 We, CTIA, about three or four years ago, coined the phrase Looming Spectrum Crisis. And I think that sort of has driven us in here to some extent. I'd like to take credit for it, but I can only do that when the folks that I work with at CTIA aren't in the room. And they do have to be in the room back there. So as a team, we came up with the phrase Looming Spectrum Crisis. And I was trying to think of how to put this all in perspective and talk about sort of the wide range of entities we have represented up here on the panel. And then I realized that since I'm the moderator, I'm just going to make it about the circle of me. And so I, in the last year, have had a number of very personal experiences involving Spectrum and the application of mobile broadband to my life personally. The first began when my 12-year-old daughter asked for and received her first mobile phone. And for anyone who is a child approaching that age, don't do it. That's all. The second was a routine visit to GW Hospital and resulted in me getting to take home for two weeks a mobile heart monitor, which was great because you can actually take it off and enjoy your life and put it back on. You don't have to drive into the hospital every day to get a check. Everything turned out fine, but it was pretty neat to see this retrofitted device that, and I won't tell you exactly how they made it work through my insurance. I don't think the truth was involved. But I had this modified wireless device, and I got to experience sort of mHealth from a first degree. And sure enough, during that time here, when I was wearing the device that came home, I lived in Arlington, Virginia, and there was a little placard hanging on a door that the power company had converted our meter, energy meter, to a smart grid, where I was beginning to experience all of the verticals. And then Krzysztof Wietnowski joined us, and we were at CTI, and we were trying to figure out a good project to have her jump into. And we started talking about mobile education, and we asked around about what would be a good school to visit for mobile education. And one of the folks who worked in the Arlington School Board said, well, actually, James Tell Elementary School, my daughter's attend, is a great school to go see. So we actually took a video team out there, visited a fourth grade class, who, every week, for a double period, stacks together a double math class, and the kids are split into four groups. And those four groups get four different mobile devices to work on. And I'll tell you what, you've never heard a quieter class in your lifetime. They move from a tablet to an iPod to a handheld device to another device, and they sort of move back and forth between those four things, both licensed and unlicensed, which is really neat to see. And then perhaps the one thing that sort of put it all back into perspective, because I think all of those were sort of extensions of the consumer experience. I was actually up in New York about a week or so before we had our trade show in San Diego. And I watched a 20-some-year-old gentleman, a best man at a wedding, deliver his best man's speech using his iPhone. And I thought, now, that is a really pretty neat application, except that he had to keep going like this to light it back up as he was giving him speech. So I thought, those are a number of different ways where I personally have experienced, I'm sure everyone in here has a range of experiences where the application of mobile broadband in your life intersect. And I thought this was a good opportunity for us to talk about, well, how do we facilitate the next iteration of mobile broadband? How do we make sure that all of these neat things we couldn't have imagined a few years ago continue to happen? So instead of starting with an opening speech by each of our five panelists, I thought I would introduce them. And then after I introduced them, they are going to be tasked in 20 words or less with sort of defining what they think a successful framework should be for future US spectrum policies. So but first, give you a quick introduction. And as Michelle did earlier, I'm going to avoid sort of the long introduction and give you a name and title. And if you don't know these people, you really should introduce yourselves. This is really a robust group. To my immediate left, we have Tom Power. Tom is the deputy chief technology officer for telecommunications with the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. To his left is Julie Knapp, Julie is the chief engineer at the Office of Engineering and Technology at the FCC. Julie's left is Susan Fox. Susan is the vice president for government relations at the Walt Disney Company. To Susan's left is Kathy Brown. She's the senior vice president of public policy and corporate responsibility at Verizon. And then anchoring the panel in the end is Harold Feld, the senior vice president at public knowledge. So I will avoid certain questions about what's going on in the federal government as we speak now outside of the telecom world. But Tom, I'm going to start with you. In 20 words or less, what do you think is the right framework for a successful US spectrum policy? I'm counting. Yeah, well, I take these assignments very seriously. We're running low on words. I'm telling you. That's funny. OK. I got it. I got it. I got it. I got it. I have it. You ready? Continue execution on existing strategies with emphasis on stakeholder collaboration. Generates innovation, jobs, and productivity. And I have five more. Period. Is that more or less? Julie, that was good. Oh, my goodness. That's a large fall. I think pragmatic solutions that take advantage of some of the more traditional approaches, the reallocations and sharing onto something more interesting and promising ways of getting more out of the spectrum. OK. I'm going to focus on one word, which is sort of a policy and a challenge, which is balance. I work for a pretty big company with the words beginning of the content stream and the end of it. And somehow we managed to balance the interests of our production for a lot of sports to what we are contemplating to distribute over fiber to the content we distribute over the air. And I've been looking at, from the user, the viewer perspective, the videos, stuff we are really talking about today, and if you combine all those, try to get the viewer away from a variety of ways to balance on the interests of the spectrum, that's your challenge. OK. So, Tom. Tom and I came up with the same boss, so we know you're going to get this right, OK? Ready? The rationalized, currently used spectrum ensure robust and frictionless secondary markets, taking my care, and take yet another look at the efficiency of federal government use. Right. Right. Harold. Forget ideology. Forget ideology. This is bigger than coast. This is bigger than commons. And if you just want to say what you've said for the last 10 years, please say it to yourself at home. All right. I like this start. OK. So, not surprisingly, we did a prep call, and none of this came out when the prep called. And in that prep call, Julie, and I wrote this down, I remember putting quotes around it, but I wrote this down, and you said, I can't imagine any industry in the United States that could compete without wireless as part of its strategy. So, I'll start with you, Julie, and we'll mix it up a little bit. But Susan, I definitely want to hear your thoughts on this. How important is it that we get it right? So, Susan, you talked about balance, but Julie, with that statement of yours in mind, how important is it that we get it right and that we have a successful framework and policy in place? Well, it's critically important that we get it right. And the point I was trying to make is that we often focus on smart phones and pads and some of the applications like M2M and health care and smart grid, and all those things are important. But what we often lose sight of is the importance of wireless to everybody in the state and our economy. We really couldn't imagine whether it's from security to manufacturing, businesses, service industries, that all rely on wireless just to be efficient. And it's critical not only to us as within the country, but to compete internationally. We have to use this technology to be efficient. So, I think it's really critical to get it right. Yeah, I was going to talk about this, but we really, those of us who work in our company on video issues, we really do start with the viewer. And we haven't talked about viewer today in this context. We talk a little bit about the consumer, a little bit about the public interest, but it's for us a sense of what does the viewer want. The viewer in our world wants to contact where they want it, when they want it, and how they want it, which is any number of interests. Most traditionally, we're put in a spectral world in the bucket of a traditional broadcaster, and it's certainly critically important that our local viewers and local markets continue to get local news and information and things like modern family, frankly, over the air. But at the same time, it's important for us that my daughter watches Phineas and Ferb and you make emails, Clubhouse on this and me, and my kids watch Monday Night Football on this. And it has to be some way of accommodating all those uses and yet maintaining a vibrant over the air transmission at the same time during the night. Harold, skip Kathy for one moment. I'll defend getting it wrong. More seriously, I am going to defend getting something out there that may be less than perfect and I think that there's a range of solutions that are right. I think that sometimes we are so concerned about finding the best possible policy or the single right outcome that we get paralyzed. And I think we've got a lot of different things that are happening, essentially on Fed spectrum. We've got to be prepared to take some risks, which means that sometimes we'll be wrong. And we have to have the courage to do that and we have to be willing to do it in a time frame that lets us actually learn and correct from those mistakes. It took us a long time to learn, the deep lock was gutsy and it took us a long time to learn from the deep lock and figure out what to do about it. But I applaud the agency for having taken the chance and I think as we move into the Fed spectrum space we've got to be willing to take some chances and we would therefore be willing to make some mistakes. And Kathy, how much time do you spend within Verizon talking about ensuring that, for those that haven't read Kathy's policy paper, I think you should take a look at it and sort of gives you a framework that she boiled down well into 20 words or less, but gives you a framework and think of how Verizon thinks of spectrum planning. Is this something that absorbs a lot of focus at Verizon? Well, just listen to what you just heard. You heard Julie say that every sector of the economy is reliant now on wireless connectivity and they don't necessarily even know it. They want things to work, they want innovation. That innovation is happening on wireless technologies across the board. Well, on the consumer side, we know that folks want more and more entertainment but that's not all. Anywhere and anytime they also want access to their bank, to their doctor, to their turned up, to their wallet, to everything that's in the consumer space. All of that depends on the availability of spectrum. So does a company like Verizon spend time thinking about the spectrum planning? Oh, yes. As it spends time thinking about all of its network capabilities because it must. The spectrum availability is spectrum is used for distribution systems. Behind that, all of those fiber cables across the country, across the ocean, across the world. But the distribution system is becoming more and more around wireless, no wire, no tethered kind of activity that all users want, doesn't matter where they are. Thus, the government who has its hands on the spectrum has to think far and wide about how to plan for this as does every company in this space. So I want to just say first that we believe that the government has done a fairly good job over the last number of years in the long term about what the issues are. Putting goals out there, pursuing policies that allow us to get the spectrum in the hands of the users. There are, I think, and you're going to find in the room, Harold, any number of things we have to keep looking at for the long term because we have to keep looking at how to reuse spectrum that's already out there, how to get it on it to be allocated, if it's been allocated by the governments of the world, how to get it into a market structure so that it can be transferred much more easily and how the federal spectrum is used more efficiently. And that does not mean, I'm not going to say the same thing with different carriers, that there aren't other innovative kinds of ways to think about it, but all of the above has to be out there. At the same time, we can't lose focus of what is time constrained, if you will. We have to keep putting the spectrum out as a focus. Tom, tell me a little bit about sort of how the administration looks at this and the need to have a sort of pragmatic forward-looking spectrum process. I know we had the president talk about it in the State of the Union, in the case of someone unprecedented on a space-time issue rise up to that level. And I know you were very helpful in that sort of enlightening the administration the importance of this. Is it something that is talked about within the White House and is there a focus on getting the policy right? Of course, it's huge. And for all the reasons that have been stated here, and I don't think I've lost this audience even before this panel, even when you look at the personal centers, education, healthcare, manufacturing, transportation or entertainment, you know, it's just tremendously important that we get the right in terms of the economy and jobs and productivity. I think we are very much in favor of the sort of all of the above, as Kevin Kennedy said. And you see it coming to fruition in a lot of different contexts. Larry Strickling at NTIA has helped kick off this process, collaborative process between the agencies and the industry and other stakeholders working specifically in the 1755 van. And it's hard work and folks are, you know, sitting down for hours at a time to work through these issues and figure out what really are the opportunities there for clearing photos without sharing with the commercial side. And you know, I dig into it every once in a while to really, you know, keep tabs on things. And you know, they are making good progress. They are discovering, you know, it's often assumptions that one side makes that are different than the other side. Technical assumptions about, you know, how many users do you assume are within some given radius of a cell tamper? And is it just a number of users or is it that you have to figure out what activity are you really engaging in? You could have 100 people with their cell phones out, but that doesn't mean that you assume that they're all using the same data where it's at the same time. Exclusion zones, you know, when they're finding out that assumptions are vastly different in terms of what kind of protection both the federal side needs, but what kind of protection they have any should run in the other direction. So that collaborative process is what I was talking about in my 19 and 21 words or whatever it was. And I think we're going to need more of that. We're seeing it too. Your folks from your industry came in on Julie's team to get the Special Temporary Authority to do that testing. You know, he worked with the FCC on the medical, the MBAN, the medical body area, and that was... We have, I know, the TAC and the FCC as well as the GAO are looking at the receivers. We have the PCAST report really looking at all the levers that play here and they all aren't. So, I think we have a range of issues coming up that are going to force us to make some difficult decisions. And I guess one of them, the one that's absorbing a fair amount of focus is the Incentive Auction. And I know Kathy would talk about we are time constrained to some extent on these issues, but we want to make sure we get it right. Harold, you basically said don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good, right? And so, how do we do that? I think we have Gary and Bill and Brett and others here. Particularly as we look at the Incentive Auction process, how do we get that balance, right? Is there a balance between being timely, being quick, and getting it right? Susan, I'll put you on the spot a little bit because you're on the broadcast side of the equation, but it's both a broadcaster that likely will remain in play, but also representing those that may, you know... Yeah, there's two sides to this. One is that the broadcaster is looking at whether to participate or not. And I feel very strongly that the broadcasters will probably believe her doing, and what they should do is that's an individual decision they're making. I don't think there's a collective mind thing going on. I think individual broadcasters have to look at what's on the table and the whole proposal. I think there is, with respect to that decision, some balancing around complexity so that the little broadcasters can figure out what their options are. As far as what the economic balance is, because at the end of the day it's an economic decision for that individual broadcaster, so additional clarity and that is always probably helpful. On the flip side of that, which is where I know we're going to get this done quickly, I do have some concern about the... And this, I think, more appropriately is a collective issue of broadcasters concerned about being happy. And I see the need, you know, we're looking at the spectrum numbers as well. We see the need quickly, we know. There's an aggressive sense to whatever spectrum is reclaimed to move that quickly. I will tell you, we were... One thing we really did live through, and Julie said this about five million times, we are on the front lines of the digital transition and which would turn off a lot of planning. We finished and did a tremendous job with it. But we had the three stations really in the country that the most disproportionately have impacted. In most few stations in the country, W-A-B-C on the channel that at the end of the day is sufficient. W-P-D-I-N-G-O-L-B-W-L-S-N-L- and we received literally thousands of complaints. So there is, you know, I get to need to speak, but I also get the need for looking at where the viewers are and making sure they're served. So I do lead to his credit as my commission after the transition really did step in and held this significantly, power increases and otherwise. But there has to be a commission to make sure that where there is demand for the analogue market is addressed. So, and how about on the forward side, yeah, the auction? So, I don't remember because they're very short in Washington. How long did it take us to get through the long time? And I think we were all sitting at the table a few years a year. We did the 97 order was the recon So, I'm optimistic actually. Let's just think about the fact that we actually got this legislation approved this last time. That it is actually at the embassy that it's actually in those applause, applause from our officer. Okay, I think I didn't say speed, I said focus. And I think I was very careful to say focus. I think the focus will bring the right down to speed. What I always get concerned about is that we get our focus with another way because events happen. And this is an undertaking that is sounding in some respect this auction. I give folks a lot of credit. I've done a lot of learning myself and thinking and listening about how this happens and happens well and convinced it can be done. We're not supposed to tell worse stories, but I remember when the auction came on, there were many doubters and I saw in the United States in a collaborative way working the next way. I have a lot of confidence that we'll be able to do it. That doesn't mean it's not complex. It doesn't mean that when you have a buyer and seller market, that's going to be a final thing in the market, that there aren't challenges here that are going to take some time, then I think that we're more likely to get there than if we lose those things. So when I say fast, I mean, it's none of us think that, but we also don't want to be where we were to be transitioned and find that the eights would work. We don't want that. We can't do it. And Julie, what do you think there is? I think one of the things that we're trying to do is have a process that's simple for the participants in the end. And the complexity, Gary's used the term complicated number of the hood. You get in your car, you can drive it, you don't know how all the systems work and all of the engineering that went into it, you just know it works. And that's the thing that's complicated when you get into the details that are impacting works and so forth. But we've tackled complicated things before. So that's no reason to shy away or to suspect that we won't be successful in the end. I have every confidence that we will. A couple of things about incentive options, which, I grant, moves us away from the federal spectrum stuff unless we're engaged. Might not be that if this works out, but just a couple of quick things. One, I think the single worst thing that Congress did in this statute was to say there will be only one because we're going to learn a lot from running the incentive option. And to have limited to the single incentive option so that all broadcasters must make a decision you're in, now you're out of technology for this at the moment and no idea how it's going to integrate into your current networks puts added pressure on this. I think that in terms of the time frame that we're talking about, I think one more useful thing that could happen is to see a lot more work being done on what 600 megahertz receivers and transmitters would look like because I give a huge number of unknowns that had to go into devising that band plan and I think the modular stuff that they came up with is probably is a very clever approach but we're learning a lot about 700 megahertz spectrum right now and including its strengths and its weaknesses that we never matched in 2008 and we had 10 years to think about how that was all going to hang together. I just got a point out about instead of auction is there are a lot more stakeholders than just the full power broadcasters and the wireless carriers who are going to be in. We have a lot of folks who are developing the TV white spaces technology. There are public safety aspects not just the people who are using FirstNet but also repacking. We have folks who often provide important diverse programming particularly with regard to Spanish language and other underrepresented linguistic minorities. There's a lot of work and parts here. I need to touch on wireless microphones. There's a lot of work and parts here and I think that we cannot underestimate that challenge even if we believe and I think we should believe the fact that it's complicated because we can't do it and we ought to go into this believing that we will do it and do it successfully. So let's talk a little bit about government spectrum. We'll get back to some of the repurposing commercial spectrum but on the government side a lot of energies to inspect looking at and responding to the PCAST reports. I think one of the things I know one of the things that troubled me was not in essence that the new norm should be sharing. How do we look at that balance between clearing and sharing? I'll start with you a little bit to talk about how the report was framed within the administration and how you view it and how that will play into our efforts going forward. So the first big note is PCAST and the president's counsel and advisors in the sense that technology is not part of the administration giving good advice and they did give good advice to make the technical point that it's not part of the administration. That being said I think they put their finger on an obvious reasonable which is that the spectrum is like commercial side demands are increasing on the middle side and at some point in a different way but this whole debate over spectrum sharing I think it's got heated in ways that are sharing because I don't think anybody is advocating a complete shift away and I think the work that's going on now in the 755 band is the exact kind of work we need to keep doing and then following up in other bands after we're done there because that's where you're going to find out what really is the art of the possible in terms of what's available whether that means clearing or sharing or some of both but I think it's often the case. So I love the sort of back and forth in the process and so forth but I think the hard work really is being done and really will be successful and now there will be technological things as there always are and that's going to be part of the solution too but I don't think we need to be debating this as an even more kind of thing it's all we've got Harold I think there are a couple of things here that a lot of people tend to miss in this debate. One of the spectrum policies in 2011 and 2012 is DOD is still master of their spectrum. Light square got tanked by DOD and DOD pulled everything they didn't like out of the spectrum legislation. CBO ranked the probability of getting 1755 to 1850 out of the hands of the military before when it was in the bill and I think that as we look at the PCAST report one of the things that animates this is we need to have some realistic expectation about how you move the military and that's going to happen over time and I think ultimately the solution to finding ways to migrate DOD off of spectrum that they have right now sharing is possible including sharing among federal users and that if we have a band which for a variety of reasons is most efficiently distributed by auction and I think 1755 may qualify for that given the global equipment market compensation then the only way you're going to get access to that is to find some way to have spectrum-sharing and other bands so that its current users are trading out and we can do that affordably Kathy your paper you talked to you should have almost bifurcated PKS's version of sharing into temporal and geographic on one side and future looking cognitive intelligent you want to talk a little bit about how you do that I'm sorry it seems to me sharing is an issue but it's not there because my view is I did we actually take a look to see what the assignments are about being more and who has expected to be done more efficiently and I know everybody's thrown my hand up and said but it felt like we got to a solution without actually having a problem except pursue with no data that says here's the issue R&D kind of recognition in that respect it's something I think that we all are really rationally thinking well what we can't do is focus on what we have to do now so that is what we said very clearly no respect to sharing there's time and there's use we are right now very engaged in the work on the 758 it's moving along fairly well with very good cooperation it's T and us and T-Mobile are there together with the government trying to sort out how to think about this I would test it what it means if you could come up with some sort of way to use it what would that look like how would that work Verizon was the first to put $5 million on the table to say let's go forward we have to start with so neither thing is exclusive of the other and I think sometimes we get ourselves wrapped up in our own rhetoric around what it is we have to do to be responsible to think about longer use and Julie do you think it's feasible to try to consider this effort on behalf of the industry and government in time to try to pair it with the 2155 to 2180 I think that's at least important but that's the goal because we have a clock ticking on the AWS 3 spectrum that would be the best companion in 1755 I think through the C-SPAN process and working rooms they're trying to target recommendations by every early next year so that's the goal to at least have an indication whether we think this can work even if so but we're free aside both the incumbents and the newcomers jump back for a moment to talk a little bit about as we begin to think about developing a framework for spectrum policy I think when we began this effort five years ago we didn't have verticals that I talked about at the beginning we didn't have the video usage we do talk a little bit about how do we include those changes going forward and then I'm going to ask how do we future proof what we're doing because I don't think we have a real sense of where these uses are going and how much they can change in the next five years so let's start Susan, with you as a content company who's looking at a delivery vehicle but potentially also looking at other uses of mobile broadband I think one of the great things about entertainment is that although it's very fluffy and light it does drive and we're hoping that it actually will actually want to watch sports and entertain our kids when they're on their doctor's radio we'll end up putting devices in people's hands who will all to use them for other purposes future proofing is very tough I will tell you how we've conceived it which is to try to define how our viewers and users want to get our content as possible in a sort of joke where the device is now ever meant however that may mean we only view frankly the capacity to view video is growing a lot of people ask us by way of example don't you haven't you found that saying ABC was the first network to put our shows on on teams the first network to have our own media player and when we did that there were questions about whether that was going to take away viewership because it's critically important and it drives a lot of revenue but it turns out that even fans of shows like modern family only watch a handful of episodes a season and not a lot of the viewing that's being done on these devices is actually bringing folks back to the traditional platform and it's all cumulative so our approach is not to hesitate to be bold I don't know that anybody can feature proof of getting devices and content to people of the arts is the way to other thoughts sure I mean to say because the United States talks about LTE that's pretty hard to compare so I think we're moving to and we keep moving to the next technology to the next technology to the next technology and we now move to the next technology where we're finding the foot the foot faster you know the balance we know that we know that that broadband on LTE is not possible but it is now being cherished by the customers who are using it and we know that this standard is moving across the world that by the way has to do with the coming out earlier the international standards spectrum to what's basically wireless broadband all that's good because it means that we're not going to have devices we're going to have conversations we're going to have all the things that get us to the next level not just at the end level because it never is but it gets us to the next level as we move more and more to IP we're seeing more and more our ability then to use that spectrum for all things of different uses right and that future will do well and this third has to do with the way and how they think about wireless and I think we're seeing different business models we're seeing different modes of way that consumers are now consuming that means that there's going to be a stage that's going to work itself out over time more and more for more and more people and I'll talk a little bit about how unlicensed and the role that it plays in sort of all of the above the verticals expansion and increased usage yeah and one of the things that we've discovered is we don't have just a spectrum crunch in license space we have a spectrum crunch in the unlicensed space and there are a couple of aspects to this one is you want to put the right kind of traffic on the right network a phone network or a data network that is designed to also serve as a phone network is architected in a very different way and people have very different expectations about it then say a Wi-Fi cloud that is hooked into your cable system nevertheless as we just saw in the Hurricane Sandy the folks who came out of that providing the greatest wireless functionality in the shortest time were Verizon which has probably one of the best engineered networks and then Comcast with its Wi-Fi because it was flexible and there and sometimes I think that when we talk about the internet of things a lot of the internet of things is the kind of traffic that fits on license where you have considered the trade-offs you have flexibility of architecture peer-to-peer type but architecture is easy to manufacture but it's also got to be robust enough traffic that is to start dropping packets it's not a catastrophe by contrast when we're talking about the need to connect to 911 in emergencies you probably are still looking to have licensed the spectrum and that's going to play an important role in the mix I think the biggest thing that we're seeing right now is that carriers are now freely mixing they're licensed and unlicensed and they're licensed they're putting in a small cell architecture which would have traditionally been any more Wi-Fi type architecture because they discovered where that's more efficient and I think the deficiency we have right now on the federal side is that federal users are still broken up and isolated and thinking of themselves as single users stuck using 20-year-old technology 30-year-old technology in some of these cases where if we attempted to aggregate federal use where we could and have some consideration of having these federal users as a whole could genuinely be a more efficient user and cap into some of these more flexible technologies we would see an enormous increase in efficiency of federal use which would make more spectrum available for the commercial use So let's jump back for a moment and talk a little bit about other ways of rationalizing or repurposing spectrum and Kathy you talked a little bit about secondary markets talking a little bit about the role that secondary markets can play in making sure that the companies that will look at spectrum for the highest best use get access to it Well, I think that the fact that one can actually set there is a secondary market in the U.S. to ensure that that's happening and that it is a key robust and it is every day there are trades that go on a financial arrangement by which people are able to move the spectrum around and the more that can be done frictionlessly that means without a lot of intrusion by the government frankly under rules that are fair the better that's going to be in order to make sure what to use for its best use at any particular time and I think as we move for instance after this incentive option that it would be thinking about what it means once that spectrum has been repackaged resold and all that what does that mean for a robust secondary market or are we going to again face a whole next round of let's figure out what the next thing is we have to do for the government to do or are we going to think through the policy as to what happens with that now available existing used spectrum so you can see the commission proposing to auction licenses in a fungible way they could end up bringing a fair amount spectrum to market secondary market basis there's another way to sort of look at secondary markets in the broadcast space I think the government the FCC quickly realized that they needed to be an aggregator to actually squeeze out some of the greatest efficiencies of reallocating the broadcast licenses but we've seen a number of other some recent examples of company-specific efforts to re-purpose spectrum whether it's the dishes MSS efforts before the commission I think we saw today the global star put a filing in along the same lines we saw AT&T working with Sirius XM in that space and Peter called it earlier ad hocory but this ad hocory approach TM sorry that's right I wrote TM apologize TM what role will this sort of approach and this approach that ultimately often ends up in front of the commission to pass judgment on you know what role will that have or should it have in spectrum policy going forward so I don't think there's a one-size-fits-all solution pragmatic is very compelling because each of those situations presented a different set of circumstances and if our end objective was we'll have to maximize the use out of that spectrum and that's what I think we've tried to do or tried to do and we're looking at and some of these things are pending it does seem to me that in other places that you look at the characteristics of the spectrum and the licensees and all those and decide what makes sense here to get more use out of it yeah I think we saw and Mike was concerned or complaining earlier about the speed with which some of these things move I think the WCS and SDR sat for quite some time until the private companies got together and tried to make sure so let me give a little shot to that first of all it really resonated when cats and people have short memories because many of these big issues that we dealt with before whether it was coming up with the PCS spectrum I remember being in the first workshop talking about this this book about risk radio we did the auction in 1996 was seven years later at some time what we talked about for what became the AWS one spectrum was IMT-2000 and the meetings began in 1990 so I'm not advocating that these things it's okay to be slow but sometimes what happens is over time as long as we're continuing to make these investments and they bear food on an ongoing basis we are doing the right thing and bringing spectrum to market they're often technical solutions sorry don't show up on the first couple of rounds and so with WCSS it's one of the things that happened we moved to a point where it suddenly became less concerned to look at a complete wide area network as much as where to how can I get capacity in the places that I needed and once you started thinking about the problem that way like the different kinds of solutions that both sides could agree to there was another element with WCSS stars 2 which is AT&T was blocked from taking over Timo and the result of that was their spectrum suddenly became much more exuded and I do think that one of the things that happens in times of shortage is that people become more innovative and you know if we want to get more from the energy industry we're suddenly getting a lot more oil out of shale and we're getting a lot more natural gas out because when the price went up enough people got very clever about technology and worked really hard about it and solved problems that had been sitting around for 30 years now as environmentalists will tell you sometimes there are consequences of that we've got to confront the fact that we're in a reality that is going to be constantly changing that in some cases that's going to have positive effects like WCSF DARS where solutions that hadn't been feasible before because the need wasn't as pressing and because the technology wasn't there you know become available and we're also going to have a lot of places where the change in the environment is going to create friction among licenses between users of licensed and unlicensed technologies and to circle back to a question about future proofing future proof this we have to learn to be comfortable with the fact that as we evolve the needs are going to evolve the technology is going to evolve and that means sad for some people in this room happy for others there will always be a need for the FCC and for federal involvement in making sure that the pieces actually still move together Okay thank you for the segue Tom how do we ensure that the pieces we've looked so we've really been to look at you to some extent at what is the right plan for you know commercial or industry based spectrum management but you know the big help in the room is how do we ensure that that the non-mobile broadband use of spectrum going forward is considered in part of this plan whether it's you know DOD or satellite uses or sort of all the ranging uses we're seeing right now are sensible rational and well thought out and not just you know following the norm because it's the norm and you know I think Carol never did you can be certain the lives of plans today you can be certain it's going to be successful for years to come in this field you know what you look at is the use of spectrum just in the last five years ten years twenty I mean it's just spectacular to me nobody's going to think you know one of the one of the statistics that the PCAS pointed to is the Defense Department of Use of Unmanned Aerial Systems that was a hundred systems or a hundred and fifty systems in two thousand and seventy five hundred systems in two thousand years I was just a regular guy about the use of spectrum and manufacturing work you know you made these say engines or other components arranged in square they have these sensors that detect slight imperfections in one part and then another machine is making the separate part that's going to connect together it can match up the sort of corresponding imperfections yeah and how do you then getting the data back and forth between these two essentially two robots you know it's like it's amazing the things that are coming forward so I think we have any flexible lives that you want I think the answer here's how we're going to live for the first time in a hundred years I think we all have the flexible there will be uncertainty and there I think does have to be a role for the government to tell the story of that truly well they there are lots of other needs besides mobile wireless they are all important and legitimate often I think we talk at very high level on the policies in front of them when you get down into the nitty gritty it's also these things it's just not so simple so when you start to look at and I'll throw out an example it's a 2700 to 2900 and when we sat down in TIA we went through well what are the places to look at just to give you an idea of how tough all of the challenges are so you look and you say well what's there oh that's the next red weather radar that's the pretty pictures that we all look at to see where the storm's coming in say well okay what can we do with this so could you relocate where would they go can you do without what do you mean do without well could we shake 20 megahertz off each end I don't know maybe it'd take us redesign of all the existing stuff it'd take us 20 years to do it that it cost of x billion dollars say well we ought to plan for that well I don't know what's going to happen in the next six months so you know I think what makes some of the other services anxious is all of the focus on mobile wireless and so they say dig in on the federal side what about us we've got needs to and I think it's incumbent on the entire sector to try don't look just at your own problem but try to look at how do you solve these things because they are very real problems and if you can't figure a way to solve them you're not going to get anywhere and the solutions will be so far down the bike they're not going to be an answer to the problem you know if we talk about centers for agencies sometimes these centers work exactly backwards I mean no doubt agencies can do a better job of you expect them more efficiently if they spend money on operating systems but there's a man who has a tug of the budget against a tug of spectrum efficiency parents have to serve and to solve and the issue of agency centers people have been struggling for quite a while because Harold talked about perhaps incentive options for agencies but you know the problem is it's not like we're going to say well you saved a bunch of spectrum we're going to give you a pot of money to do whatever you want with it's like if the O.D. gets to the tanks if they need the tanks if they don't get the tanks if they don't need the tanks it's not like here's a little sludge bond you can go to which one and that's really been the challenge we've never had in the paper tonight or tomorrow that Commissioner Rosenworst will propose to actually taking some money from the auction and reimbursing you know some of the government agencies as part of an effort so I'm sorry I think there's there may be a solution I just don't think I mean it's quite figured it out then yeah Chris also coming from minimum Julie and Harold talking about bad system users and new users and unlicensed and two communities that on the contents before the transmission that I work a lot with selling the wireless mic community and broadcast auxiliary spectrum which is a spectrum as usual you see the news trucks around there and there we have shared actually for a long time it's largely because of the work of folks who volunteer to frequency coordination and those are communities who are nervous about combining licensed non-licensed users because they have the coordination of work because they know each other and frankly like last night Pittsburgh waited Monday night football we used I think 40 UHF channels to get over 12 TV channels 40 UHF frequencies over 12 different TV channels to get that production calling so those are the folks of an AC the repacking company and those community communities are already doing less spectrums than they were five years ago and the message is there's always going to be less for them because it's not worth it when next I should get next week's Monday night football game but if there's an afference in Pittsburgh last night they're not going to stick around and figure out what the source of the interference was if there's an afference in their chairs sure last week when they're covering what they said they're not going to stick around and figure out what the source of it was and then if it's unlicensed it's going to take a long time so there are challenges where people say go slowly you know that's some of the Russian and as you go there's a microphone right back to you we got it? good okay so question for Tom as we've noted the new class tax relief act had substantial spectrum provisions and that act was presented instead of fitting 99% rather than the 1% some people have argued that that act created incentives to transfer literally intensively in the dollars of public wealth to private enterprise the Sumner Repstones Rupert Verdox the ABCs of this world literally billions of dollars each of these major buyers as a result of the incentives so that it would be you know setting up a huge giveaway let's just assume that the administration didn't accept that incentive analysis and said okay that wasn't the incentives that we were creating but now 15 years go by we have an academic that's written the definitive book on the development of America's crucial wireless infrastructure it says yeah that's actually the incentives that were set up led to this massive transfer of wealth and then you're asked what do you feel about that your question specifically is you know you know yeah everybody agreed that the only way that we could get the spectrum used is visually given the political realities of America the incredible power of the broadcasters and the spectrum lobby was to give it away that was the price would you say that you in retrospect that that was a worthy price to pay to give this incredible wealth of America the most powerful wealth of corporations individuals in order to solve this political problem and get that spectrum without the use is that a trade off that you think was a reasonable trade off this is the question I've been asked in 20, 27 15 years 15 years yes it was okay this is the price to be paying for getting the spectrum used that type of windfall I think my first answer would be could you please pass me another beer 15 years to help us yes it's not my answer yeah that's why I did it so many congress said it alright so we voted in on this congress congress said it I wouldn't call it an unnecessary wealth transfer because there are broadcasters in this instance where they have to do something and in many instances exit broadcast or chat shows so my 18 megahertz front license and will call it yeah this is that's the continuum as well oh no this is no question this is how the mic was used yes okay use the wireless technology and wireless okay now I'm on this one okay so I have an affirmation I'm Cheryl Leanda and I'm speaking about the United Children crisis at this point in response to the request for more public interest not just an unlicensed discussion I guess the question I wanted to have for this sharing panel is one of the things that I've been trying to look at is is there any room for new entrances small companies coming in and sharing maybe is this the opportunity for people to come in I mean for the size being dismayed and concerned about what's going to happen they are broadcasting what's going to happen to the diversity of owners which is already dismal I'm afraid that's going to diminish the other question I have is is there any room for any new entrances for any of these entrepreneurs who are a color or women who are currently owning a TV station who may decide it's in their message to get out so they can never be able to get back in doing something else doing a little more so part of what I wonder is whether sharing or subtly saying is that really an opportunity for small markets for small entrepreneurs I don't know so it would be it's more about the opportunity for small entrepreneurs we in public knowledge have certainly thought that the sharing spectrum creates enormous opportunities for new entrances and entrepreneurs now sometimes when we say new entrances that turns out to be the Comcast Time Warner Cable and other people who are new to this space but we are also seeing that this creates an enormous set of opportunities sometimes out of traditional carrier space smart meters and ITRON for example particularly with regard to the ways of women owned businesses and communities of color and also particularly with regard to content distribution of content I think that there are tremendous opportunities there the issues that arise are one what's the object of the exercise it is very different if you are a content producer who is from a community that has been traditionally marginalized and says I'm losing low power television how am I going to get the things out there that serve my community and how am I going to do it in a way that reaches my people where they live as opposed to just put something on the internet and hope people find it I do think that there are opportunities there and that there are some people who are doing exciting things and that we need to be thinking about it I think that there are opportunities in licensed as well but these are enhanced a tremendous amount by the presence of unlicensed spectrum and the possibilities for spectrum sharing so I certainly hope that communities of color and women owned businesses and others will take a very careful look at the spectrum sharing as a means of developing new opportunities or extending the existing lines of the channel other questions yes how would a discussion of expansion of high speed wire line to the end user change the conversation that we just listened to just provide our folks provide our folks I would say that there's folks and they use both in a different way by myself and we use it consuming the ball games etc at a ridiculous amount of time however it's not that interestingly we're using a lot of wireless probably but at the same time we're on that big fiber that's being used all over the house so interestingly so however if you look at the usage in our house which I assume is not necessarily difficult but not difficult there's probably 6 or 8 wireless devices at the same time that there's a Wi-Fi going on outside to the Wi-Fi so I actually think that consumers like both what's interesting is the investment with respect to each and I was looking a lot around this in the developing world for instance with respect to what the leapfrog technology will be after years and years I was really of this long debate about running fiber to communities and it turns out that this LTE technology is going to be the leapfrog technology at 10, 11, 12 20, maybe 30 megabits about per second now it's going to be interesting to watch how this goes and then to watch how the usage goes but I think AT&T actually just answered this question in a very interesting and compelling way one of the to me as just where in my de-cat for a moment exciting things about the AT&T announcement in addition to all of the terrifying things about the AT&T announcement is that it's an effort to totally integrate wire line and small cell architecture and wireless into a seamless all-IP network that involves probably the most significant new investment in DSL technology that we have seen in the country in years and I'm hoping that this is going to have a broader impact and show that wire line wireless works synergistically together one of the biggest issues in the Verizon spectrum code fight was about Wi-Fi offload and how the cable operators are potentially changing their role and how others with networks may potentially change their role with regard to federal spectrum I think that absolutely one of the questions we ought to be having with regard to the efficiency of federal spectrum is the federal government has a lot of fiber in the ground and we ought to be asking you know what if we what if we persuaded Congress to actually invest some money in upgrading federal wireless architecture as opposed to that we took advantage of all of these assets rather than continue with our current structure which is to have every agency that needs to do something wirelessly get an allocation from NTIA and figure it out for themselves It's like we've run out of time so if you could join me in thanking our panel