Transcripts For CSPAN House Energy Subcommittee Hearing On W

The nation infrastructure from foreign interference. Lawmakers heard testimony from boating industry experts. Today, that the subcommittee will consider a number of legislative broke pulls that justss proposals that i challenges from management to securing our nations Telecommunications Infrastructure. The proposals before the subcommittee today are hr 4462, resourcesirway efficiency act, or the chirac, act, with the Ranking Member. Thisll be the strategy for federal energies using advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence, automated frequency what are nation, and environmental sensing to facilitate more efficient sharing and used by the federal government. The goal would also require the fcc to report to congress on the feasibility of using existing sharing technologies on several important spectrum fans. As we look toward the future, it is necessary for every licensee to use spectrum more efficiently, the federal government being chief among them. Modernizend ways to the government uses and shares spectrum among agencies and departments as well as with the commercial sector. The cprs band is a great example of accommodating a wide range of users and uses. Just yesterday, the fcc voted on an order to sell licenses in the cbrs band, and it launched commercial operations. This will come by and licensed, unlicensed, and federal incumbent users in one band and protect incumbent rights and make sure spectrum is always available for use. My hope is the share act cannot as a bridge for future innovation scenarios like we see in the same brs band. Cbrs band. Next, the Information Security sharing act. This legislation would establish an Information Sharing Program and the department of Homeland Security to share this the Security Risk information. It will help providers, but most importantly small role providers small rural providers with one has lushly been closeddoor largely been closeddoor discussions with equipment vendors. Creating a that by program. After that, we have hr 4459, the secure and trusted Communications Network act introduced by the chairman and the Ranking Member which will require the fcc to create a list of equipment and services that pose a risk to National Security. It will remove it and replace it with trusted equipment and services. Telecom services is far too essential for any of our Nations Carriers to be used in a trust in our network. The subcommittee will also consider hr 2881, the secure 5g. Nd beyond act it would require the government to work with strategic allies to secure five g networks and ensure the u. S. Five g networks are secure and work with industry to warn against political influence. Next, promoting the wireless leadership act of 2019. We will also consider hr 2063, efrontiertier act act. In a lick of House Resolution 575, expressing the sense of the house that all stakeholders in the deployment of five g consider and adhere to the ripples which was introduced by two of our representatives. Our memberecognize for participating, currently director of the division at the Software Engineering institute at Carnegie Melon University in pittsburgh, the heart of my congressional district. Where always glad to have someone from cmu on the panel. She served as acting assistant secretary in the office of cybersecurity and communications at the department of Homeland Security and established and led the department of defenses response team. To want to thank her for appearing before the subcommittee today. I look forward to a discussion of all of these proposals. Recognizes the Ranking Member of the suommitt for his opening statement. Mr. Latta thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to thank our witnesses for being with us today as we discuss legislation on our Network Supply chain, security and management of our spectrum resources. There are several bipartisan bills on todays hearing that address the challenges we face to ens our Critical Communications infrastructure is secured from vulnerability. Im especially pleased to have worked with our subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from pennsylvania, on h. R. 4462. The share act. To empower our agencies to cile kit facilitate innovative spectrum strategies to more efficiently use our airwaves. As the agency principally responsible for advising the president on spectrum and telecommunication matters, ntia should continue to play a plead role in a collective government approach in managing the access to spectrum resources. This bill helps empower ntia to meet the needs of technology. Todays hearing also includes several bills to address vulnerabilities in our nations communication network. Many Providers Networks contain equipment supplied by suspect foreign carriers, however, this is only because the carrier didnt the provider didnt understand the associated risk. The bill before us seeks to prevent this type of situation from occurring on a forwardlooking basis. Undersndably, these providers are in a period of uncertainty and althe they may want to do their part to protect National Security they may need help doing. F. C. C. Voiced concerns preventing about use of certain equipment. So as the nation comes to grips with these requirements it is critical we work in a bipartisan way to ensure that they can revisit how those conditions impact the winning bid in order to keep their equipment free from security vulnerabilities. Not only do we want to prevent the federal funding to pay for gear that may pose a national Security Risk, but we do not want winners of c. A. F. Actions auctions to be put in an unattainable meet. I want to thank again our witnesses for being with us today and for the testimony today and im going to yield the rest of my time to the gentleman from illinois. Thank you, mr. Chairman, for yielding. The security of American Communications and Information Networks is paramustnt to National Security. Its a field i know fairly well from my time in the military but he sword cuts beth ways. Certain foreign adversaries have forced back door insecurities into their products. Mr. Kinzinger no Foreign Government should be able to do. This in an effort to avoid purchasing or installing this dangerous equipment im worked with chairman doyle on the Network Security and information sharing act, i look forward to that discussion and yield back o my friend. Mr. Doyle the gentleman yield back. The chair recognizes mr. Pallone, the chairman of the full committee, for his opening statement. Mr. Pallone thank you, chairman doyle. Today we are considering a series of bills to manage americas wireless future to promote innovation and better serve all americans an guarantee our Wireless Networks are secure from foreign adversaries who may wish to spy on americans or do us harm. I applaud the work of chairman doyle and Ranking Member latta introducing the share act. It will implement longstanding policy at key agencies like the federal Communications Commission remain responsible for spectrum policy. These agencies can act as parties for other departments. At our hearing in july we heard that the management of federal government spectrum requires a strong central voice at ntia and i think the share act does a great job to help them meet the Mission Critical needs of Government Agencies in a more efficient an modern way. The f. C. C. Must remain in the drivers seat when it comes to commercial spectrum. Im pleased that the share act requires the f. C. C. To expand and improve the revolutionary sharing techniques being rolled out. When it comes to securing from foreign adversary, i want to thank representative walden and matsui and guthrie for partnering with me to introduce the securing our Nations Communications act. It will prevent spending money on equipment and services that undermine National Security. We also establish a program to help small carriers remove compromised equipment and replace it with secure alternatives. As we have heard, much of the Global Supply chain for Telecommunications Equipment flows through china at one point or another chinese central policies allow staterun manufacturers like huawei to sell suspect equipment to american providers cheaper than nearly everyone else. Although many of the bigger carriers have avoided these threats, theres still a significant issue for smaller and more rural carriers who built their Networks Using suspect equipment. The Nations Networks are interconnected meaning one weak link can harm the whole system. We must help smaller carriers remove suspect equipment for the gheefed country. Representatives kinzinger and yle have bills on this point discuss risk with providers. I want to introduce dean brenner, a witness on the panel, and i yield the balance of my time to ms. Matsui. Ms. Matsui thank you very much im pleased were considering h. R. 4459 to create a new fund to provide financial incentives to small, Rural Wireless providers to replace certain equipment from huawei and z. T. E. With new equipment with security capabilities. We must continue to consider policies that spur u. S. Leadership and innovation in the 5g race. H. R. 4459 will help provide additional security for americas Top Communications providers. More needs to be done with respect to americas policy that includes smart spectrum policy for beth licensed and unlicensed use for 5g and beyond. We must explore opportunities to auction the cband. My bill strikes the right bans by aiming to clear at least 300 mega hearts of spectrum and is supported by a broad range of stake holders. I continue to work with chairman doyle on this issue. Additionally, congressman guthrie and i introduced the spectrum now act that provides a pathway to make an additional 100 mega hertz of spectrum available. This is not only critical but necessary for expanding use. I also continue to focus on resolving the 20yearold debate her the five. Dmb the 5. 9 gigahertz band. With that, i yield back to the hairman. Mr. Doyle the gentleman yields back. It is now my pleasure to recognize, he just made his grand entrance, my good friend,. Walton, member of the full committee. Mr. Walden thank you for being here. Your insight will be important to a process we began last congress. Our nations Telecommunications Infrastructure represents the lifeblood of a free and open societyismforto disrupt that infrastuckture should be taken as an effort to undermine our liberties. Todays the bills before us today continue on a commitment we made last congress that commitment is to have a bipartisan process to mitigate threats and secure this sector Going Forward. Moreover, i know chairman pallone and i agree that the energy and Commerce Committee is singularly able to speak to these topic in the congress and with both sides working together with stake holders ranging from industries and Civil Society we can do so successfully. Everyone in this room should agree on the importance of securing our neighs networks from vulnerable equipment. We heard testimony two years ago on the vulnerabilities in these networks and heard of the impact on rural providers who may be more disproportionally impacted as they seek to stay in budget not to mention with guidance to deploy the most effective products. Unfortunately, ourdversaes have no reservations about one way or another subsidizing their pet companies. Thus they become attractive optioners in budget sensitive providers. Small broadband providers in my own state are trying to make a go of deploying broadband net woshes to ensure they connect with most constituents in some of the hard toast reach places. You can certainly find those in my district. Many of these providers dont have an army of consultants with the necessary security clearances to fully appreciate vulnerabilities that do exist and how to inform their purchasing decisions. For those who receive federal support to build out Broadband Networks in unserved areas like many of the providers in my di westrict cannot set them up for failure by requiring home to select the hest cost equipment option only then for uncle sam to later say oh by the way, not that lowest cost equipment. We need to get this right. H. R. 4461, the Network Security information sharing act would facilitate exactly the type of information sharing kneed by rural providers that have vulnerable equipment in their networks. This was the center priest of our bipartisan discussions in the last congress and im pleased to see this concept taking shape in todays hearing. H. R. 4459, the secure and trusted Communications Networks act, which im an original cosponsor of, would further address this problem by setting up a Reimbursement Program to rip and replace vulnerable equipment from these networks while we still have some details to work out on eway to market, the program is modeled on the f. C. C. s so far successful repack Reimbursement Program. We need to get this right. It is critical to our National Security but also to our competitiveness as we start rolling out new technologies. Which brings me to another topic i raised at the july spectrum hearing of how russia is seeking to inflauns our discourse on deployment of next generation networks. Congresswoman eshoo and degette also shared my concern at that hearing as we continue our work to close the Digital Divide we must be prepared to prevent threats from those seeking to diminish americas standing in the world. Just this past weeking, my staff saw this card which was posted on a Bulletin Board by the rayburn cafeteria. The details are pretty scant who is behind this campaign. It lists a litany of why 5g is supposedly bad. It collects numerous stories arn the country on things wrong with 5g. Ironically one of those stories about a Community Health fears stopping a 5g rollout in australia while at the same time noting the World Health Organization stated there should not be health risks from 5 it is g and Cornell University Research Shows 5g networks to be safer than previous networks. We have to be vigilant. We have to be individual lant about efforts to influence our thinking in this space and i hope the committee will look ahead at other efforts being pursued to stifle our internet architecture. Liing forward to hearing about the other bills put forward by our members today, mr. Chairman, as thoughtful approaches to these challenges. Thanks again for having this hearing. I do hope the full committee or the Oversight Committee will or this committee will do some looking into whats being pushed out there in the public side news behind it. We need facts. Thank you. I yield back. Mr. Doyle i thank the gentleman. The chair would like to remind members that all members written Opening Statements shall be made part of the record. So id like to introduce our witnesses for todays hearing. Software stempfley, Engineering Institute at carnegie mellon. Mr. John nettles, president of pine belt wireless. Thank you for being here. Mr. Harold feld, Senior Vice President , public knowledge, harold, thank you again. And mr. Dean brenner, Senior Vice President , spectrum strategy and tech policy for qualcomm incorporated. Mr. Brenner, thank you. We want to thank all of you for ginning us today. We look forward to your come. To your testimony. At this time the chair will recognize each witness for five minutes. To provide their opening statement. Before we begin, ill like to explain the lighting system in front of you is system. In front of you is a series of lights. The light will initially be green at the start of our opening statement, it will turn yelllow when you have one minute remain, please begin to wrap up your remark at that point. When the light turns red were just going to cut your microphones off. Stempfley, e ms. You are recognized for five minutes. Hit your microphone button there ms. Stempfley thank you very much. Chairman doyle, Ranking Member lattark members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in this hearing today and speak on supply chain risks in the Telecommunications Industry. Ive been a publicer is van working in Information Technology focused on the application of information and technology to Telecommunications Infrastructure<\/a>. The proposals before the subcommittee today are hr 4462, resourcesirway efficiency act, or the chirac, act, with the Ranking Member<\/a>. Thisll be the strategy for federal energies using advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence, automated frequency what are nation, and environmental sensing to facilitate more efficient sharing and used by the federal government. The goal would also require the fcc to report to congress on the feasibility of using existing sharing technologies on several important spectrum fans. As we look toward the future, it is necessary for every licensee to use spectrum more efficiently, the federal government being chief among them. Modernizend ways to the government uses and shares spectrum among agencies and departments as well as with the commercial sector. The cprs band is a great example of accommodating a wide range of users and uses. Just yesterday, the fcc voted on an order to sell licenses in the cbrs band, and it launched commercial operations. This will come by and licensed, unlicensed, and federal incumbent users in one band and protect incumbent rights and make sure spectrum is always available for use. My hope is the share act cannot as a bridge for future innovation scenarios like we see in the same brs band. Cbrs band. Next, the Information Security<\/a> sharing act. This legislation would establish an Information Sharing Program<\/a> and the department of Homeland Security<\/a> to share this the Security Risk<\/a> information. It will help providers, but most importantly small role providers small rural providers with one has lushly been closeddoor largely been closeddoor discussions with equipment vendors. Creating a that by program. After that, we have hr 4459, the secure and trusted Communications Network<\/a> act introduced by the chairman and the Ranking Member<\/a> which will require the fcc to create a list of equipment and services that pose a risk to National Security<\/a>. It will remove it and replace it with trusted equipment and services. Telecom services is far too essential for any of our Nations Carriers<\/a> to be used in a trust in our network. The subcommittee will also consider hr 2881, the secure 5g. Nd beyond act it would require the government to work with strategic allies to secure five g networks and ensure the u. S. Five g networks are secure and work with industry to warn against political influence. Next, promoting the wireless leadership act of 2019. We will also consider hr 2063, efrontiertier act act. In a lick of House Resolution<\/a> 575, expressing the sense of the house that all stakeholders in the deployment of five g consider and adhere to the ripples which was introduced by two of our representatives. Our memberecognize for participating, currently director of the division at the Software Engineering<\/a> institute at Carnegie Melon University<\/a> in pittsburgh, the heart of my congressional district. Where always glad to have someone from cmu on the panel. She served as acting assistant secretary in the office of cybersecurity and communications at the department of Homeland Security<\/a> and established and led the department of defenses response team. To want to thank her for appearing before the subcommittee today. I look forward to a discussion of all of these proposals. Recognizes the Ranking Member<\/a> of the suommitt for his opening statement. Mr. Latta thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to thank our witnesses for being with us today as we discuss legislation on our Network Supply<\/a> chain, security and management of our spectrum resources. There are several bipartisan bills on todays hearing that address the challenges we face to ens our Critical Communications<\/a> infrastructure is secured from vulnerability. Im especially pleased to have worked with our subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from pennsylvania, on h. R. 4462. The share act. To empower our agencies to cile kit facilitate innovative spectrum strategies to more efficiently use our airwaves. As the agency principally responsible for advising the president on spectrum and telecommunication matters, ntia should continue to play a plead role in a collective government approach in managing the access to spectrum resources. This bill helps empower ntia to meet the needs of technology. Todays hearing also includes several bills to address vulnerabilities in our nations communication network. Many Providers Networks<\/a> contain equipment supplied by suspect foreign carriers, however, this is only because the carrier didnt the provider didnt understand the associated risk. The bill before us seeks to prevent this type of situation from occurring on a forwardlooking basis. Undersndably, these providers are in a period of uncertainty and althe they may want to do their part to protect National Security<\/a> they may need help doing. F. C. C. Voiced concerns preventing about use of certain equipment. So as the nation comes to grips with these requirements it is critical we work in a bipartisan way to ensure that they can revisit how those conditions impact the winning bid in order to keep their equipment free from security vulnerabilities. Not only do we want to prevent the federal funding to pay for gear that may pose a national Security Risk<\/a>, but we do not want winners of c. A. F. Actions auctions to be put in an unattainable meet. I want to thank again our witnesses for being with us today and for the testimony today and im going to yield the rest of my time to the gentleman from illinois. Thank you, mr. Chairman, for yielding. The security of American Communications<\/a> and Information Networks<\/a> is paramustnt to National Security<\/a>. Its a field i know fairly well from my time in the military but he sword cuts beth ways. Certain foreign adversaries have forced back door insecurities into their products. Mr. Kinzinger no Foreign Government<\/a> should be able to do. This in an effort to avoid purchasing or installing this dangerous equipment im worked with chairman doyle on the Network Security<\/a> and information sharing act, i look forward to that discussion and yield back o my friend. Mr. Doyle the gentleman yield back. The chair recognizes mr. Pallone, the chairman of the full committee, for his opening statement. Mr. Pallone thank you, chairman doyle. Today we are considering a series of bills to manage americas wireless future to promote innovation and better serve all americans an guarantee our Wireless Networks<\/a> are secure from foreign adversaries who may wish to spy on americans or do us harm. I applaud the work of chairman doyle and Ranking Member<\/a> latta introducing the share act. It will implement longstanding policy at key agencies like the federal Communications Commission<\/a> remain responsible for spectrum policy. These agencies can act as parties for other departments. At our hearing in july we heard that the management of federal government spectrum requires a strong central voice at ntia and i think the share act does a great job to help them meet the Mission Critical<\/a> needs of Government Agencies<\/a> in a more efficient an modern way. The f. C. C. Must remain in the drivers seat when it comes to commercial spectrum. Im pleased that the share act requires the f. C. C. To expand and improve the revolutionary sharing techniques being rolled out. When it comes to securing from foreign adversary, i want to thank representative walden and matsui and guthrie for partnering with me to introduce the securing our Nations Communications<\/a> act. It will prevent spending money on equipment and services that undermine National Security<\/a>. We also establish a program to help small carriers remove compromised equipment and replace it with secure alternatives. As we have heard, much of the Global Supply<\/a> chain for Telecommunications Equipment<\/a> flows through china at one point or another chinese central policies allow staterun manufacturers like huawei to sell suspect equipment to american providers cheaper than nearly everyone else. Although many of the bigger carriers have avoided these threats, theres still a significant issue for smaller and more rural carriers who built their Networks Using<\/a> suspect equipment. The Nations Networks<\/a> are interconnected meaning one weak link can harm the whole system. We must help smaller carriers remove suspect equipment for the gheefed country. Representatives kinzinger and yle have bills on this point discuss risk with providers. I want to introduce dean brenner, a witness on the panel, and i yield the balance of my time to ms. Matsui. Ms. Matsui thank you very much im pleased were considering h. R. 4459 to create a new fund to provide financial incentives to small, Rural Wireless<\/a> providers to replace certain equipment from huawei and z. T. E. With new equipment with security capabilities. We must continue to consider policies that spur u. S. Leadership and innovation in the 5g race. H. R. 4459 will help provide additional security for americas Top Communications<\/a> providers. More needs to be done with respect to americas policy that includes smart spectrum policy for beth licensed and unlicensed use for 5g and beyond. We must explore opportunities to auction the cband. My bill strikes the right bans by aiming to clear at least 300 mega hearts of spectrum and is supported by a broad range of stake holders. I continue to work with chairman doyle on this issue. Additionally, congressman guthrie and i introduced the spectrum now act that provides a pathway to make an additional 100 mega hertz of spectrum available. This is not only critical but necessary for expanding use. I also continue to focus on resolving the 20yearold debate her the five. Dmb the 5. 9 gigahertz band. With that, i yield back to the hairman. Mr. Doyle the gentleman yields back. It is now my pleasure to recognize, he just made his grand entrance, my good friend,. Walton, member of the full committee. Mr. Walden thank you for being here. Your insight will be important to a process we began last congress. Our nations Telecommunications Infrastructure<\/a> represents the lifeblood of a free and open societyismforto disrupt that infrastuckture should be taken as an effort to undermine our liberties. Todays the bills before us today continue on a commitment we made last congress that commitment is to have a bipartisan process to mitigate threats and secure this sector Going Forward<\/a>. Moreover, i know chairman pallone and i agree that the energy and Commerce Committee<\/a> is singularly able to speak to these topic in the congress and with both sides working together with stake holders ranging from industries and Civil Society<\/a> we can do so successfully. Everyone in this room should agree on the importance of securing our neighs networks from vulnerable equipment. We heard testimony two years ago on the vulnerabilities in these networks and heard of the impact on rural providers who may be more disproportionally impacted as they seek to stay in budget not to mention with guidance to deploy the most effective products. Unfortunately, ourdversaes have no reservations about one way or another subsidizing their pet companies. Thus they become attractive optioners in budget sensitive providers. Small broadband providers in my own state are trying to make a go of deploying broadband net woshes to ensure they connect with most constituents in some of the hard toast reach places. You can certainly find those in my district. Many of these providers dont have an army of consultants with the necessary security clearances to fully appreciate vulnerabilities that do exist and how to inform their purchasing decisions. For those who receive federal support to build out Broadband Networks<\/a> in unserved areas like many of the providers in my di westrict cannot set them up for failure by requiring home to select the hest cost equipment option only then for uncle sam to later say oh by the way, not that lowest cost equipment. We need to get this right. H. R. 4461, the Network Security<\/a> information sharing act would facilitate exactly the type of information sharing kneed by rural providers that have vulnerable equipment in their networks. This was the center priest of our bipartisan discussions in the last congress and im pleased to see this concept taking shape in todays hearing. H. R. 4459, the secure and trusted Communications Network<\/a>s act, which im an original cosponsor of, would further address this problem by setting up a Reimbursement Program<\/a> to rip and replace vulnerable equipment from these networks while we still have some details to work out on eway to market, the program is modeled on the f. C. C. s so far successful repack Reimbursement Program<\/a>. We need to get this right. It is critical to our National Security<\/a> but also to our competitiveness as we start rolling out new technologies. Which brings me to another topic i raised at the july spectrum hearing of how russia is seeking to inflauns our discourse on deployment of next generation networks. Congresswoman eshoo and degette also shared my concern at that hearing as we continue our work to close the Digital Divide<\/a> we must be prepared to prevent threats from those seeking to diminish americas standing in the world. Just this past weeking, my staff saw this card which was posted on a Bulletin Board<\/a> by the rayburn cafeteria. The details are pretty scant who is behind this campaign. It lists a litany of why 5g is supposedly bad. It collects numerous stories arn the country on things wrong with 5g. Ironically one of those stories about a Community Health<\/a> fears stopping a 5g rollout in australia while at the same time noting the World Health Organization<\/a> stated there should not be health risks from 5 it is g and Cornell University<\/a> Research Shows<\/a> 5g networks to be safer than previous networks. We have to be vigilant. We have to be individual lant about efforts to influence our thinking in this space and i hope the committee will look ahead at other efforts being pursued to stifle our internet architecture. Liing forward to hearing about the other bills put forward by our members today, mr. Chairman, as thoughtful approaches to these challenges. Thanks again for having this hearing. I do hope the full committee or the Oversight Committee<\/a> will or this committee will do some looking into whats being pushed out there in the public side news behind it. We need facts. Thank you. I yield back. Mr. Doyle i thank the gentleman. The chair would like to remind members that all members written Opening Statements<\/a> shall be made part of the record. So id like to introduce our witnesses for todays hearing. Software stempfley, Engineering Institute<\/a> at carnegie mellon. Mr. John nettles, president of pine belt wireless. Thank you for being here. Mr. Harold feld, Senior Vice President<\/a> , public knowledge, harold, thank you again. And mr. Dean brenner, Senior Vice President<\/a> , spectrum strategy and tech policy for qualcomm incorporated. Mr. Brenner, thank you. We want to thank all of you for ginning us today. We look forward to your come. To your testimony. At this time the chair will recognize each witness for five minutes. To provide their opening statement. Before we begin, ill like to explain the lighting system in front of you is system. In front of you is a series of lights. The light will initially be green at the start of our opening statement, it will turn yelllow when you have one minute remain, please begin to wrap up your remark at that point. When the light turns red were just going to cut your microphones off. Stempfley, e ms. You are recognized for five minutes. Hit your microphone button there ms. Stempfley thank you very much. Chairman doyle, Ranking Member<\/a> lattark members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in this hearing today and speak on supply chain risks in the Telecommunications Industry<\/a>. Ive been a publicer is van working in Information Technology<\/a> focused on the application of information and technology to National Security<\/a> and Public Safety<\/a> missions for serving as years. Managing director at the division at carn ghee mellon Software Engineering<\/a> institute where we focus on partnering with government, industry and academia doing applied research to improve resilience of computer systems, information and networks. The Telecommunications Second<\/a> store a global system made of companies, suppliers an users that make communications possible. Bauds the Telecom Industry<\/a> is responsible for the flow of information it is inextricably linked to how we work, play and live and plays a fundamental role in society from business to government to family thch eexplosion of devices, new meths of computing within the infrastructure has only increased the attacks and therefore the responsibility of telecoms to participate in overall defense efforts. Ult montanaly the supply chain for the Telecommunications Industry<\/a> is vital to achieving security at scale. Historically checks an balances in the supply chain have been largely procedural such as licenses, warranties, legal resource, supplier reputation and have reasonably assured against defects and service failure. Unfortunately, these controls are increasingly inadequate when applied to Global Supply<\/a> chains for the complex information and Communications Technology<\/a> that underpin critical capabilities in this industry. An everexpanding supply chain means external dependencies must be rigorously measured and strategically managed for an organization to remain resilient. This means addressing key areas in integration of the supply chains, Service Supply<\/a> chains an Software Supply<\/a> chains. The ramifications of an attack anywhere on the infrastructure could spread well beyond the point of origin and affect entire nations, businesses and private citizens. We must address not only the horde ware but the software and services as well. The bills today including the secure and trusted commupe cases act of 2019 and the information sharing act of 2019 are a good first step. Spray ties implement Chain Security<\/a> at every same of development and supply, must continue to be the forwardleaning focus of the service and software and supply chain assurance efforts within government and industry. Attacks against our supply chains unite iachoirers and suppliers for scaleable means that arise through malice or neblings. Suppliers and acquirers need standardized methods for conveying information about common issues related to hardware and Software Issues<\/a> especially regarding nonconforming products that contain counterfeit or tainted components and can cause subsequent harm. Fund. Ally the outcomes we are seeking to manage are simple. Even though the methods to accomplish them are not. First suppliers must physical he practices that reduce supply chain risks. Second, products provided by suppliers are acceptably secure. Third, the message method of distribution or transmission of the oduct to the purchaser guard against tampering. And fifpbleely, the product or service is used or sustained with acceptable security. The acquisition Security Framework<\/a> and external dependencies management element of Cyber Resilience<\/a> management model which was developed through Research Done<\/a> by researchers demonstrates the following practice areas are elms of a mature supply chain Risk Management<\/a> effort. Establishment in management of key relationships, engineering practices, secure product operations, and an understanding and management of supply chain technologies an overall infrastructure. As private as public functions grow ever more inseparable from the Information Technology<\/a> systems that support them, healthy publicprivate partnerships become more necessary. To protect this infrastructure against growing and evolving threats requires a layered approach. We must encuren enhanced security and resilience while identifying gaps not filled by the marketplace. Information pert nene to the supply chain such as supplier security information should be shared along with mitigation plans to those who need it. Actionable and usable information sharing must recognize the differing capabilities and roles of all parties pans and are key to successful sharing programs. Lastly we must guard against the false choice between security and innovation. Thank you. Mr. Doyle thank you very much. Mr. Nettles youre recognized for five minutes. Mr. Nettles chairman doyle, Ranking Member<\/a> lattark members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify about securing in theworks and the support needed to keep Rural America<\/a> connected. I have a familyowned and operated company established by my father in the 1950s. We have worked hard to keap pace with technology and keep the company in the family. We raunched our Wireless Network<\/a> in 2005. We have brun to 65 sites and provide 4g l. T. E. Across five counties include manage areas where ours is the only signal present. Not only do our customer depend on our network but in an average day we provide Wireless Voice<\/a> and Data Connectivity<\/a> to as many as 30,000 visitors, most of whom are just passing through. We support efforts to Harden Networks<\/a> 57bd protect against potential National Security<\/a> threats. While the industry buzzes with excitement over the great things to come from 5g Network Buildout<\/a> we we and many other Small Companies<\/a> have been virtually frozen since early last year by the security concerns of currently deployed equipment. Our network was rebuilt a few years ago with equipment from z. T. E. Through our participation in the phase one process, the reverse auction in which winning bidders were those showing the lowest cost to serve the greatest number of road mile. Our main performance criterion was to provide as much coverage as possible, as inexpensively as possible. We solicited quotes from five different vendors and z. T. E. s were the lowest. With no restrictions on using their equipment our selection was a nobrainer. The choice we made not only enabled us to meet our mandated mf1 build utah requirement bus also provided us with a reliable platform on which we could quickly deploy 4g l. T. E. Despite challenges of our lowdensity footprint we were optimistic that this experience would allow us to provide the slatest the latest services to our communitier if balance of the Current Technology<\/a> generation and provade a Solid Foundation<\/a> for the next. Unfortunately as the uncertainties have grown regarding whether well be able to continue to use z. T. E. Equipment my optimism has diminished. At too time when we should be focused on expansion plans an upgrades were concerned about whether well be able to continue to provide services at all. This would squander 20 years of Network Expansion<\/a> and 20 million in investments. We find ourselveses in this predict. More or less because under the Mobility Fund<\/a> program we simply did our best to do what the government required of us to bring service to our neighbors. With the news of the bills being discussed today i can sincerely report my optimism is returning. I am confident that by working with the small effective carriers, congress and the appropriate federal agencies will be able to establish reasonable and sound policies that provide the essential Financial Resources<\/a> needed for those carriers to secure their network. The legislative efforts pending before this subcommittee take significant steps to plot a path to the future by establishing the secure and trusted Communications Network<\/a> Reimbursement Program<\/a>, determining the list of covered commupe cases equipment or services, mitigating ad mrtive burdens on small rural carriers, targeting Network Risks<\/a> and supporting information sharing. As Congress Acts<\/a> on these Critical Issues<\/a> it is important that solutions are implemented in a timely manner to support National Security<\/a>. They are execute in the right order to maintain services. And that sufficient resources are allocated to get it right. With several efforts under way including through the executive order and pending proseedings to prohibit use of covered congresswomen theres no time to waste and funding in funding the replacement equipment. While many referred to the process as rip and replace, i say that perhaps we really need to be talking replace and then rip, otherwise services will indeed be disrupted. Finally as commissioner starks noted in a Public Statement<\/a> last week this is a National Problem<\/a> that deserves a National Solution<\/a> and we shouldnt expect small carriers who acted legally and in good faith to replace their insecure equipment on their own. It is critical that congress act swiftly to provide resource for the replacement of covered equipment particularly for small rural carriers who are unable to cover the cost without assistance. I believe the legislation before the subcommittee today accomplishes these goals. And i applaud your work to legislate and secure our wireless future. I yen unionly appreciate the opportunity to share little of the story of my familys company and welcome any questions you may have. Thank you, mr. Nettles. Mr. Feld youre recognized for five minutes. Mr. Feld thank you for inviting me here this morning. I applaud the subcommittee for moving forward with a set of bills designed to promote innovation and security in 5g networks. I want to focus on the following bills. The share acts, the Network Sharing<\/a> information act, the secure trusted information act and efrontiersable they have share act, everyone here is familiar with the problem of our increasingly crowded airwaves. Our efforts to find spectrum for 5g deployments have caused conflict and uncertainty among federal and comma commercial users, investing in spectrum sharing technology is a necessary investment to resolving these Going Forward<\/a>. In addition to research and share big federal users, with other federal users, the study the cbrs band will contribute enormously to our understanding of how to create a win for all spectrum users. This Development Process<\/a> balances the interest and concerns of multiple stake holders an attracted early investment from licensed as well as unlicensed users. All while protecting federal interests. To meet our spectrum needs Going Forward<\/a> we need to set aside our old feuds and embrace systems that accommodate everyone and maximize spectrum use. This cbrs process tells us we can do it and we should build on this success. Importantly, we should not think about he share act as simply a means of bringing up more federal spectrum for commercial use. The technologies developed should be seen as the first step in rethinking federal Spectrum Management<\/a> to move from the current stale and static system of specific assignments to a dynamic sharing system that allows the frft to levramming economies of scale and provide federal agencies with the spectrum they need to meet their responsibilities. Nsis and stcna are both good ideas to address supply Chain Security<\/a> in u. S. Communications networks. With regard to the secure and trusted Communications Network<\/a> act we have suggested slight modifications to further clarify that theres a mechanism so covered entities can be remove fled list. Although nothing in the statute has written prevents development of such a proses is process it is always best to clarify these things to avoid confusion. Ded to include purchases fccna made off august, 2018, to ensure small carriers can be reimbursed for equipment not listed at time of purchase. Its a benefit to us all. These changes would affirmatively serve the Public Interest<\/a> an protect National Security<\/a>. We look forward to continuing to work with the committee on these issues. Efrontier. It is you are often repeated that the most important rule of legislating is first d no harm. The sweeping language used in the statute creates potential barriers to federal provision of Emergency Communications<\/a> services or ways to leverage existing federal assets to address the Digital Divide<\/a>. A proposal does not need to actually violate the law to cause delay or prevent needed action. For example, if the federal government were trying to make federal fiber available to commercial carriers in the immediate aftermath of a natural disaster, no one would want to introduce delay and uncertainty while Legal Counsel<\/a> debate whether this would be a wholesale network under the act. There is no plan to build the National Network<\/a> of any sort, nor could any future administration do so without an appropriation from congress. Given that enactment of efrontier provides no additional benefit to offset the risk of unintended consequences, we strongly recommend that this bill not move forward. Thank you very much, i look forward to your questions. Thank you very much. Mr. Brenner, youre recognized for five minutes. Chairman doyle, Ranking Member<\/a> la latta and members of the subcommittee, my name is dean brenner an im here on behalf Hoff Qualcomm<\/a> which was founded in a san diego living room but is now the largest supplier of chips for smart phones and other wireless devices and the leading inventor and licenser of new technology. The technologies we develop and the chips we design depend on one key input controlled by the government. Spectrum. As this committee, subcommittee has recognized enabling a steady stream of new spectrum, low, mid, and high band, licensed unlicensed and shared is essential for the rapid broad 5g rollout. Were working on 5g at a feverish pace. Our work depends on the continued stream of spectrum. 5g is launched our four continents. More 30 5 gs g networks have launched and are expanning. Over 20 mores manufacturers are selling or making 5 it is g devices. Qualcomms chip are in more than devices re than 150 5g including phones, hotspots and fix dwaces. We support the u. S. Was the first country to launch in subseven gigahertz an wave. Let me explain severalive 5g game chamingers which will launch soon and further accelerate the 5g rollout. Dynamic spectrum sharing enables to run 5 gs g. Instead of having to empty a 4g spectrum band which could take 0 years or more, this will enable a band to be used simultaneously for both 4g and 5g. Enhanced millimeter wave will enable fixed wireless to be ewed for broadband. It allows 5g fixed wireless one mile away covering a much larger arian than larger area than anyone thought possible. It will enable this technology along with new forms of wifi qualcomm is developing would be deployed in new six gigahertz now under consideration by the fcc. Qualcomms 5g small cell chips will expan 5g to more people and locations particularly indoos using millimeter wave. Cellular vehicle to everything or cv to x Technology First<\/a> with g and then 5g allows cars to ommunicate with other cars and buildings. It must waive or change rules for 5. 9 gigahertz which only allowed deployment of dsrc. Let me turn to 5g security which has been a high priority ever since we started working on 5g even though we dont manufacture core network commiment. We have worked on this internally and with other companies and in a group which sets 5g standards. For many years we have been an active participant in the Communications Spectrum<\/a> security. Most recently we appreciated the bipartisan may 9 letter sent from the chairman and Ranking Member<\/a> os of this subcommittee and the full committee to f. C. C. Chairman pai asking to examine 5g security. Subsequently, one of our engineers was apointed to leave the working lead the working group on managing Security Risk<\/a> and emerging 5g implements as. Members include exports , perts from county risk, network operators, standards groups an a trade association. We look forward to advancing 5 it is g security through this group. Finally, qualcomm has been working on spectrum sharing for many, many years. Weve worked directly with ntia and other Government Agencies<\/a> as well as private sector colleague. Often a spectrum band analyzed for sharing involves multiple cabinet departments and multiple entities in those departments. Over the years it has played a Critical Role<\/a> gathering input from government players, leading join publicprivate Technical Work<\/a> and speaking with a single voice for the executive branch to make unified greater progress toward sharing. This process culminated most recently in the initial commercial deemployments in the cbrs band a Great Development<\/a> to increase the amount of mid band spectrum. Were please wed heightened interest in sharing across the frft and look forward to continuing to work through this process to enable more intensive spectrum sharing. Thank you very much and i look forward to your questions. Thank you, mr. Benner. Mr. Doyle thank you, mr. Bener. We have concluded openings. We move to member questions. Each member will have five minutes to ask questions of the witnesses. I will start by recognizing myself for five minutes. Ms. Stempfley, what risks are being posed by untrusted congresswomen in our nations teleCommunications Network<\/a>s and what kinds of things can hostile foreign actors do if they have access to that equipment . Ms. Stempfley thank you for the question. S i said in my testimony the Telecommunications Infrastructure<\/a> prvidse great interconnectivity and serves as a foundation of many other many elements, and it also has cascading dependency with other infrastructures an therefore presents a key area of focus. The supply chain concerns are equally within that, are difficult to identify and could provide a great deal of access not just to the environment, the Services Provided<\/a> but the management infrastructure underneath. I think it goes without saying that they are of great concern for us to understand. I mean weve heard reports reports of hostile foreign actors accessing our nations electrical grid and infrastructure. What other critical sectors would couled they access if they access the carriers network through compromised equipment . Unfortunately, the work we do couldnt give you a clear answer. To that activity. The piece of it that i think we all understand is the Telecommunications Infrastructure<\/a>, the electric sector, Financial Sector<\/a> are all interdependent and that, i think that speaks to the potential cascading effects. What are the benefits of establishing a strategy for the federal government to develop the test beds for more efficient spectrum sharing and what benefit dts you see applying the lessons we lerped in the cbrs band and other federal bands . Thank you. The need for more sharing is obvious but the benefits of sharing go beyond simply ensuring that the federal government can maintain its current functions. The dynamic spectrum sharing and other technologies that mr. Brenner referred to allow the federal government potential forly for first time to act as a single spectrum useder rather than atom miesing spectrum allocations in our current system. Additionally the cbrs band demonstrates the importance of accommodating federal users, licenseprotected useders, unlicensed users which has been the holy grail of spectrum policy. The ability to let everybody do what they need to do and what they wan to do is the ultimate goal of spectrum policy and these sharing technologies will make that possible. Mr. Doyle thank you, mr. Feld. Mr. Nettles, how do you see the Network Information<\/a> sharing act benefiting your couldnt company Going Forward<\/a> and mitigating risk to your supply chain . Mr. Nettles thank you, mr. Chairman. It would be a tremendous benefit to us. Were a pretty Small Company<\/a>. We have 50 employees to cover in all lines of business. About half ofdedicated to our w network. Its difficult to say the least o keep up with when its not shared openly. You dont know what you dont know. Thats kind of where we found ourselves a few years back in our z. T. E. Selection. Mr. Doyle ms. Stempfley do you believe the information sharing act i introduced with representative kinzinger will help smaller Telecom Providers<\/a> receive information related to supply Chain Security<\/a> threats an what are the challenge you have seen in communicating these to companies that dont have the personnel of a tyre one carrier . Ms. Stempfley i think the focus on ensuring that information is aktsable and usable to all parties is an important part of the bill and any information sharing related program. The key thing we have found, that i have found in building these sharing activities is recognizing the capacity that the organization has to take action, so is it clear what they should do . And is it communicated to them in a language and method they can receive it in . Mr. Doyle thank you very much. I yield 25 seconds back as an example for the rest of the committee. And now yield to my good friend, mr. Latta. Mr. Latta thank you, mr. Chairman. Thanks to our witnesses for being with us today. Mr. Brenner, if i could start my questions with you, please. The u. S. Wireless industry has prospered due to markbased Technological Innovations<\/a> and policies that incentive size growth. Weve led the way with spectrum auctions in the early 1990s and more recently with the successful a a. W. S. One and three auctions how important are the tools given in the share act to continue u. S. Wireless leadership over the next decade. Mr. Brenner the tools are tie vital but i suggest the list of he tools which is in section 106b2b needs to be added to include two more. The first we call look before talk. So today the way an unlicensed channel would be shared if the four of us on this panel were share, ill get to use it one fourth of the time and id have to be quiet the other threefourths. The same for mr. Feld, same for mr. Nettles, same for ms. Stempfley. But with 5g, we are translating we are sending in a highly directional manner. Weve demonstrated this technology. As long as we each are able to detect in what direction the other will be using the spectrum all four of us could use the spectrum at once, thereby dramatically increasing utilization for everyone. We call it look for talk. The technical name is coordinated multipoint. The second tool thats vital is sin cronyization. If we also synchronized our watches while we were sharing the channel because of the time based aspect of spectrum sharing, if we were in sync with one another wed mine miz the amount of time, of dead time on the channel and again all of us would be able to use the channel more which would be a benefit to everyone. Mr. Latta thank you very much. Ms. Stempfley, with your Prior Experience<\/a> in the office of Cyber Security<\/a> and communications at d. H. S. Would you discuss how h. R. 4461 would if you think consistent with existing executive branch work screens to facilitate information sharing with small rural providers . Ms. Stempfley thank you very much. I truly appreciate the focus on the small rural provider related activity. Thats an important part of our nations train structure. Within the Information Sharing Program<\/a>s that exist, sharing typically happens between a Government Entity<\/a> with consolidated group, whether its an isac or trade association and information is further disseminated from there i think the way the bill would work would be to ensure the complete path exists and is successful so that the pronedvider not only can receive the information but then can provide the feedback back into the government that the full set of activities has occurred. Appreciate that in the build. Mr. Latta thank you. H. R. 4459 calls for disposal of suspect equipment. Do you have concerns about this equipment being resold on the secondary market and also from a technological perspective, could this equipment be sanitized and resold or should it be destroyed entirely . Ms. Stempfley there are many nuances within your question, sir. I appreciate the depth of it. There is ingalls a concern as if you listen though many areas you must address in the supply chain from Relationship Management<\/a> to operations practices theres always a concern that equipment that is vulnerable could be used in another place and that should be addressed directly. So the idea of how to either sanitize or destroy the equipment is an important question. It is unclear whether it will be sanitizeable. It really depends on what the risk within the supply chain that youre dealing with. In some instances you can do something as simple as change software or firmware. In other instances it can be more profound as an engineering flaw. That would need a greater, more severe response. Mr. Latta let me follow up quickly with that. When you tack about being able to do it. What would be the expertise one would have to have to be sure its totally sanitized . Ms. Stempfley i believe youd need network expertise, Cyber Security<\/a> expertise and some level of software and hardware programming expertise in order to ensure it. Mr. Latta i yelled back the last 17 seconds and submit questions to the witnesses to be answered later. Mr. Doyle thank you. Another good example from the leadership of the committee. Mr. Mcnerney, youre recognized for five minutes. Mr. Mcnerney i thank the chairman for his leadership here. I thank the witnesses. I represent a district that has a lot of rural areas. I believe the wire lescariers would agree with you about need to need for Additional Resources<\/a> to replace some equipment. Do you think the High Cost Program<\/a> under the universal service fund has contributed to these problems . If so, could you explain that a little . I think it contributed to it. The direction seems a little bit askew to the policy objectives providing the most service to the as many people everywhere as you can. The areas that are generally the least served or most underserved are those that lack economies of scale. The abandonment of the notion of rate of return seems a little counterintuitive or backwards. To say whats the least amount of money, i want you to go serve this area thats already uneconomical to serve but for the least amount of money youll take to do it. It doesnt quite add up to me. Mr. Mcnerney thank you. Ms. Stempfley, its clear a major factor is that the cheapest equipment has led to equipment with the least security. How do we ensure equipment is more affordable that secure equipment is more affordable . Ms. Stempfley youve hit upon one of the most difficult challenges in security and that is trying to ensure that we understand what security requirements exist and we engineer them in from the beginning. We talk a lot about the fact that organizations have accepted a security debt that debt is handed to them when they purchase insecure components that where security was not considered from the beginning. Bringing those requirements into the engineering and design phase is the most important way to increase mr. Mcnerney could make our congresswomen more competitive with huawei and z. T. E. Do you agree, mr. Feled . Mr. Feld yes. I think the problem here is as other people focus on economies of scale and the ability of foreign mr. Mcnerney would you talk into the microphone. Mr. Feld sorry. Yes, i agree cost is a big concern. We need to make sure that security is affordable for everyone. If we do not take steps to try to equalize the Playing Field<\/a> for countries like china that can subsidize insecure equipment or have their own economies of scale, ultimately its consumers who will pay the cost. Either of needing to buy higher priced equipment or from insecure networks. Mr. Mcnerney you were earlier singing the praises of spectrum sharing among federal users as well as nonfederal users. Are there opportunities for this mod tole work out between commercially licensed and unlicensed users . Mr. Feld i believe there are a lot of opportunities that can be explored here. One of the important elements of cbrs is called user share which means if the license provider is not actually using the spectrum exass dity in an area, then somebody else can. When the licensee is ready to deploy then the unlicensed equipment will stop working because of the spectrum access system. So the spectrum can be in productive use all the time and the license provider can decide when its appropriate to deploy. But we dont have to have rural areas captive to buildout in the urban areas first. We can have local spride providers deploy using these sharing concepts. Mr. Mcnerney why isnt sharing enough spectrum for unlicensed ver sis, how can that help close the Digital Divide<\/a> . Tip we have a number of local providers who are Small Businesses<\/a>, ire wireless i. S. P. s, who use right now the unlicensed spectrum to provide because that equipment is affordable and available and because they are in areas that the larger licensed carriers simply dont want to serve they dont provide enough rate of return. But these guys who are actually part of the committee in Small Businesses<\/a> can make it work if we allow them to make it work. Giving them access to additional spectrum capacity will be a huge boost in their ability to provide service in rural areas. Mr. Mcnerney before i close i want to make a plug for the Digital Equity<\/a> act which i introduced yesterday and then brdband adoption. Mr. Feld and which we acknowledge and fully support. Mr. Doyle the gentleman yields back. The chair recognizes the Ranking Member<\/a> of the committee. Mr. Walden h. R. 4459 calls for the Reimbursement Program<\/a> to be completed within a year. With your staffing and the funds suggested in the draft, how confident are you that you could replace all your z. T. E. Quipment in that timeline . Mr. Nettles thats going to be a challenge no other way to put it. I guess its sort of in part depends on when is day zero in that process. If weve got, i believe there was also provision that gave the f. C. C. Up to a year to establish what was actually on the equipment, at this stable in the game without knowing which of the components within the network will have to be replaced it would be difficult, if it involved both the core its impossible to do it within a year without concentrated effort from suppliers, you know, the mr. Walden equipment shortages, labor shortages, we have been through a couple of these types of transitions with the repack. Brd casters and all, you give them 39 mops, everybody rushes out to get it done. Mr. Nettles labor shortages would be the most probable situation. Mr. Walden if we are able to address the uncertainty and provide relief to providers especially when they used Mobility Fund<\/a> one money to build the network, what could happen . What should bewe be aware of . Could this lead to a loss of 911 coverage in some areas if providers like you are the only provider in that area . Mr. Nettles definitely. If were required to rip it out first and then put in replacement equipment, it would be like sell yurg car before you buy your new one. Youre going to be walking. Mr. Walden got it. Mr. Brenner, i want to come to you with a question on Spectrum Management<\/a>. H. R. 4462, the share act, as a company that sees everying an until this a whole debate from licensed spectrum used in 5 dts g to unlicensed spectrum to offload a lot of traffic to shared trum and federal users, how important is it that ntia have full visibility and control over federal access to spectrum in order to gain the most efficiencies while still meeting the missions of the agencies in mr. Brenner thank you for that question, congressman walden. Its extremely important. Ntia was created in the late 1970s because each federal agency had their own spectrum system and there was no single coordinator. For sure we would not have been able to achieve the success with the cbrs band without having ntia play that role. As you mentioned, you know, as qualcomm, we work with everyone. As i mentioned in my testimony. Its great to hear the Defense Department<\/a> has a revolutionary attitude about spectrum sharing. But these are very complicated situations. So in the two bands that are mentioned in the shared act, one of them, seven gigahertz, has 8,700 federal assignments of spectrum. The 3. 1 to 3357b9 band has 450 assignments of spectrum. Ntia in august sent a memo to the federal agencies, tell us, weve got all these assignments who is actually using the spectrum . There has to be a single voice. Mr. Walden a clearinghouse, somebody overseeing it. I wont put you on the spot, i dont have to. Were in a bit of a struggle right now, where d. O. D. , at least allegedly, wants to grab more control over management of spectrum. Some of us believe that sort of an agency grab away if ntia. We witnessed this in the last congress when they wanted to afoid f. D. A. Apruffle of drugs and medical devices for battlefield needs because they were irritated with the slowness and want approval of one product, which we got resolved but they wanted to be their own f. D. A. I think its bad public plcy. You dont have to respond that because you work with all of them. I think if theres a couple of things that bring us together as republicans an democrats on this subcommittee, this is one of them. Couple of them. So its something we care a lot about. Finally, you know, mr. Chairman, in light of the votes on the floor coming, ill yield back. But again thank you to all of you for your testimony. Mr. Doyle i thank the gentleman. Mr. Veasey, youre recognized or five minutes. Mr. Veasey thank you very much. Appreciate it. Happy that we are here today to talk about this very important subject. Id like to thank our witnesses for coming here to share your experiences and expertise as we talk about this very critically important infrastructure, this Wireless Infrastructure<\/a> thats important for our future. I wanted to ask mr. Stempfley ms. Stempfley, excuse me. In your testimony, you discussed this eneed to manage risk across the entire global chain regarding Wireless Infrastructure<\/a> including manufacturing and integration supply chains, currently, the only other major supplier of 5g networking equipment are huawei, zte, nokia and erksson, all of those are foreign companies. There are no major u. S. Producers of this technology. The secure and trusted Communications Network<\/a>s act will mandate no federal funds can be used if Communications Equipment<\/a> in service that pose an unacceptable risk to National Security<\/a>. Given the language and the welcome of u. S. Protiros of u. S. Telecom equipment what manufacturer cab we use to ensure we dont face the same issue later, after the risky equipment has been removed and replaced . Ms. Stempfley i appreciate the question. Unfortunately, that is not really my area of expertise, i can only speculate. I regret im not in a position to talk about suppliers in the market. Mr. Veasey are there any doctor anybody can answer this one are there any u. S. Producers of this Telecommunications Equipment<\/a> that can pick up the slack that will be created in the market by prohibiting certain foreignmade products . And if so how long duping it would take for that producer to create enough infrastructure to create the equipment thats contemplated being replaced . Mr. Nettles if i may, ill go back to the answer i gave a few minutes ago. It depends on what, it absolutely depends on what we have to replace. If we have to replace the radios and the core, thats one order of magnitude. If its just the core, thats a little more manageable. Including the ability to rehome our networks to existing cores that are in place from an train structure sharing standpoint. Veencor osome nearby vendors in the u. S. That make some part. The challenge we have as a Small Company<\/a> when you buy components from different vendors it makes, it adds a level of complexity in making everything work together. At makes it almost unmanageable. Its my understanding as far as the major vendors, nokia and,son an even samsung is one thats been mentioned as one that would meet being based in a democratic country would be one that would be considered a favorable equipment. Mr. Veasey in your testimony you discussed the challenges of providing Wireless Service<\/a> to Rural Communities<\/a> and the cost considerations of certain wireless equipment over others. You also discussed the concerns about the ability of small providers and to make upgrades to facilitate next Generation Services<\/a> in rural areas. Could you give me your opinion regarding whether the provisions in the secure trusted Communications Act<\/a> would substantially delay 5g and other wireless deployment to unserve and underserved communities . Would it delay ley . I think it would make it it would make it even more possible. Right now, im looking at do i even try to stay in the business or do i just, you know, get what i can for it and walk away. Mr. Veasey thank you. Mr. Chairman, i yield back. Mr. Doyle i thank the gentleman. The chair recognize mrs. Johnson for five minutes. Mr. Johnson thank you, mr. Chairman. I appreciate the hearing. Mr. Brenner, as you know, the share act calls for the establishment of an integrated spectrum automation enterprise strategy with at least one test bed to facilitate the sharing of spf of spectrum by more than one federal entity. Can you touch on the importance of establishing a sharing test bed, what are some of the potential cons quepses if the f. C. C. And ntia dont require this capability before federal entities attempt to share the same spectrum space . Mr. Brenner thank you, congressman, for that question. At qualcomm we constantly, aggressively, 247, we have tests going on of new technologies all over the place. Largely at our campus in san diego but around the world. Our whole business is inventing new technologies and testing and testing and testing them to convince providers like mr. Nettles that theyre beneficial tore deploy. To condition vince vendors to deploy them. Thats the approach thats been successful to establishing yates leadership in the wireless space. Having that same kind of capability occur so that the testing can occur on the federal side, i would say would be vital. You gave a gad explanation of why its important but what happens if we dont do that . What are the consequences if the f. C. C. Doesnt require this capability before federal entities atempt to share that same spectrum space . Brip the f. C. C. Cant require federal entities to do testing. Thats point one. Point two, if no one else, the the f. C. C. Has an independent agency has no authority over executive agencies. Second of all if you dont have that capability in the executive agencies then what you have is what weve had for the last several decades, the federal government continues to use old legacy systems and they dont have a modern Wireless Communications<\/a> capability that we have in the commercial sector. That is bad in and of itself. To have sharing but becomes extremely difficult because the commercial sector has state of the Art Technology<\/a> or as federal government has legacy systems that were never designed for sharing. Who you have any thoughts on that . I completely agree with everything that has been said. Theso want to stress enormous opportunity here for the federal government to leverage its vast economies of scale. It requires that there be this focused, central testing. Somebody has to be responsible for making it happen. It cant be left to the vagaries of agencies. We need to understand that, most agencies, they are not interested in spectrum policy. They are trying to get their Mission Accomplished<\/a> and do it within a budgets for which upgrading or testing equipment is simply not an element. There is no reason to believe these things will happen without a statutory mandate to make it occur. In your testimony, you talked about the importance of having a full view of the dependencies and complexities of supply chains as they change moving into the future. Thisrole does or should continue to play mccord knitting a software or hardware bill of materials . I would like to commend them on the work they have been doing. In our experience in handling risks, particularly softwareoriented risks, we found this bill of materials is plausibly the most effective way to understand the complexities and nested nature of all of the technology that exists in place and provides a foundation to integrate Software Bills<\/a> of material with others. We would like to continue to see a leadership role within the government on this topic. Thank you, mr. Chairman. The chair recognizes mr. Soto for five minutes. Thank you, chairman the House Committee<\/a> has stated that china has quote the means and opportunity, and motor to use Telecommunications Companies<\/a> for malicious purposes. By show of hands, how many of you agree with that assessment . Interesting. Again is the House Permanent Select Committee<\/a> on intelligence has stated china has quote the means, opportunities, and motive to use Telecommunications Companies<\/a> for malicious purposes. Please raise your hand if you agree with that statement. It would be great to hear first on why youenner disagree with that statement. Thank you. It is not that i agree or disagree, i dont have any information about china as a country, their capabilities to affect our Communications System<\/a> i obviously think that would be therrible thing and i think u. S. Government should do everything in its disposal to make sure that does not happen. , a reasonou say china i did not raise my hand is we sell chips to vendors, some of them are chinese, and they are deploying our chips in phones in china i think that is a very good thing for u. S. Leadership and i have no information, obviously that there are any security issues. But i completely share the concern if china has the capabilities to harm the united states. I want them to do everything they can to prevent that. Cspans washington journal live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. Coming up wednesday morning, we discussed legal challenges to roe v. Wade with the president and ceo of americans united for life. And the former senior counsel to the whitewater investigation will join us. Well talk about impeachment efforts and the whistleblower complaint. Also, we will discuss what is happening to asylumseekers when they reached the u. S. Mexico watch washington journal live at seven Eastern Washington<\/a> wednesday morning. Join the discussion. Live wednesday on the cspan the housepeaker of nancy pelosi holds a News Conference<\/a> at 10 45 a. M. Eastern on cspan. Of foreigne Council Relations<\/a> holds a discussion on u. S. Policy towards syria. , we join the Washington Post<\/a> Cybersecurity Department<\/a> with remarks from former secretary the former secretary and director of , weonal intelligence 12 05 hear from author and Washington Post<\/a> columnist and a former congressman. 12 30, theat Federalist Society<\/a> hosts legal scholars and journalists to preview the Upcoming Supreme Court<\/a> term and the case is expected to come before the. Ourt next, a hearing on School Safety<\/a> and gun violence. The House Committee<\/a> heard from a parent of a student killed in a School Shooting<\/a> and a School Shooting<\/a> survivor and cofounder of march for our lives. This is one hour and 15 minutes. [background sounds]","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"archive.org","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","width":"800","height":"600","url":"\/\/ia803109.us.archive.org\/19\/items\/CSPAN_20191002_045300_House_Energy_Subcommittee_Hearing_on_Wireless_Infrastructure_Security\/CSPAN_20191002_045300_House_Energy_Subcommittee_Hearing_on_Wireless_Infrastructure_Security.thumbs\/CSPAN_20191002_045300_House_Energy_Subcommittee_Hearing_on_Wireless_Infrastructure_Security_000001.jpg"}},"autauthor":{"@type":"Organization"},"author":{"sameAs":"archive.org","name":"archive.org"}}],"coverageEndTime":"20240716T12:35:10+00:00"}