Secretary of Commerce Donald Evans was the keynote speaker at today’s Spectrum Summit. Following are his prepared remarks.
As I stand here in our Department auditorium, I am reminded of the first time I stood on this stage. It was Jan 23rd. I had been President Bush’s Commerce secretary for just 72 hours. The security guards at the front desk were still asking for my I.D. when I came in, and I was still asking where the men’s room was.
I walked into this room to meet the employees of the Department of Commerce, as a group, for the first time. As I shook hands, I met scientists and economists, trade development specialists and telecom experts. It was a humbling—maybe even intimidating—experience. A whole lot of smart people in this one department—people with expertise so specialized I had only an inkling of what they did.
Soon after that initial meeting, some of those really smart, specialized people brought a chart like this one into my office. Imagine my surprise when I realized it wasn’t a new piece of modern art for my office! You can guess what kind of headache I acquired when they started trying to explain how to divide up this chart into hertz, megahertz, gigahertz and then how to measure power into DB (that means per meter per hertz).
In the time since then though, I have witnessed a tremendous potential of all those smart people with their specialized know-how. It has been my privilege to lead this department, to help harness their potential … to seek solutions to some of our nation’s most vexing challenges … to devise new ways to tackle old problems … to make life better for the people of this great country.
I am so grateful to each of you for being here today, for putting your smarts and your expertise to work for us, for being part of the solution for wise, successful spectrum management.
You work at this summit matters. It’s about much more than who gets access to which color on this chart behind me. It is about the United States’ global leadership in communications and information technology. It is about a higher quality of life for the people of our great country and, indeed, for the people around the world.
- Spectrum-related products and services have been an important part of this growth.
- Wireless phones and data devices have spurred business efficiency and productivity.
- Broadcast television and radio have kept people better-informed and entertained.
- Wireless links provide critical communications support to national infrastructures like telephone and cable systems.
- And today, more than ever, we are conscious of the importance of spectrum-related technology to our national defense and homeland security.
But the spectrum that allows us to enjoy these and other technologies is a finite and already fairly crowded resource. Take a look at this chart behind me: 96 percent of the spectrum use is in less than 10 percent of the spectrum (the spectrum below 3 GHz). That 10 % is so popular because of its superior technical quality.
The challenge we face is that now there are new wireless technologies on the horizon, and they want to use the same 10 percent of the spectrum. So our challenge is this: How do we fit new world-leading technologies into the U.S.’s own cramped spectrum allocation.
The challenge expands when we take into account how other countries use their spectrum (which often varies dramatically from how we do it).
For our adjacent neighbors—Canada and Mexico—we want to make sure we don’t cause each other to interference.
In some cases, we may want to try to harmonize spectrum usage with other countries so our citizens can use their wireless devices when they travel as well as potentially enjoy lower prices resulting from greater economies of scale equipment production.
That’s why we’re all here today. The U.S. has been a leader in technology, and we want keep it that way. While debate over spectrum allocation has sometimes been a heated one, there is one thing I can safely say that all parties agree on: it is not an option to close the door on new technologies, and the benefits they bring to our society.
For you and me, that means scrutinizing the way we manage spectrum in this country—asking a lot of tough questions so we can arrive at the best possible approach, an approach that will ensure our country maintains its leadership position as new technologies come on line, without jeopardizing existing spectrum use that is critical to our safety and security.
This is a tough problem. I know. It’s been front-and-center on my radar screen since that big spectrum chart was first hauled into my office about 15 months ago. In the Bush administration, we’ve taken a team approach to this challenge, and I’ve been working on it hand-in-glove with Chairman Powell at the FCC and with Sam Bodman, our Deputy Secretary of Commerce, as well as with Nancy Victory and Mike Gallagher and their talented team here at NTIA.
The challenges we are facing with spectrum management are very similar to those we have faced with ultrawideband technology—and I am confident we can meet them with the same success.
On ultrawideband, we met with all those who have a major stake in the technology—from the federal government and those who develop ultrawideband technologies, to firefighters and electronics manufacturers who want to use it. We used technical studies produced by NTIA and a private sector to see where and how UWB could be authorized to operate. And, we have made important progress. We found a way to accommodate valuable new UWB technologies without jeopardizing important existing users. We figured out how to make room for technologies like vehicular radar and wireless communications while also protecting users like air traffic control radars and global positioning satellite systems. Our work on ultrawideband is far from over, but we are on the right path.
My experience with ultrawideband made it clear that we must improve how we manage spectrum. We should mot have to go through a drawn-out contentious process every time a new spectrum-based technology comes along. We need to ask and answer tough questions:
- Are we encouraging efficiency?
- Are regulations and processes putting up unnecessary road blocks to deployment of new services or upgrades to existing ones?
- Are we engaging in the right type of spectrum planning?
- Is our role in global spectrum management as effective as it could be?
- And how do we best address the spectrum needs of national defense and homeland security, as well as those of the private sector?
This summit is a critical step in the administration’s thorough review of spectrum management. We want your ideas on the critical questions about the current U.S. approach to spectrum management. This issue is too important not to get it right.
I want to thank you for helping us move in the right direction. With your ideas and opinions, and the cooperation and leadership of Nancy Victory and Michael Powell, I am confident we will achieve a spectrum management policy that will serve the people of our country very well.
