Copyright 2002 eMediaMillWorks, Inc.
(f/k/a Federal
Document Clearing House, Inc.)
Federal Document Clearing House
Congressional Testimony
March 7, 2002 Thursday
SECTION: CAPITOL HILL HEARING TESTIMONY
LENGTH: 5784 words
COMMITTEE:
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS
SUBCOMMITTEE:
COMMERCE, JUSTICE, AND STATE, THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED AGENCIES
HEADLINE: FY 2003 APPROPRIATIONS
TESTIMONY-BY: MICHAEL K. POWELL, CHAIRMAN
AFFILIATION: FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
BODY: Statement of Michael K. Powell Chairman
Federal Communications Commission
Before the Subcommittee on Commerce,
Justice, State, and the Judiciary of the Committee on Appropriations United
States Senate
The Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") continues
its efforts to implement a longterm business plan designed to make it a more
responsive, efficient and effective agency, capable of facing the technological
and economic opportunities and challenges of the new millennium. As always, the
Commission's efforts are guided by its commitment to protect consumer welfare
and the public interest.
To effectuate its goals, the FCC has requested
$278,092,000 and 1,975 FTEs for Fiscal Year 2003. This request includes
$9,765,000 to fund the Administration's government-wide proposal to fully fund
retirement costs in each agency's budget. The Commission's requested operating
costs are $268,327,000. The FCC has demonstrated during the past calendar year a
commitment to its regulatory purpose. The fundamental mission of the FCC is to
implement the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, in a manner that promotes
competition, innovation, deregulation, and the availability of high-quality
communications services for all Americans.
The Fiscal Year 2002 funds
have been, and are continuing to be, used to fund critical infrastructure
improvements, especially related to the FCC's information technology needs, and
to improving consumer services and reducing regulatory backlogs. The FCC also
has dedicated resources to improving its workforce, hiring more engineers,
training staff, and providing incentives for talented staff to remain for longer
periods of time and serve the public interest. During the past year, the
Commission began improvements at the Columbia, Maryland Laboratory facility to
upgrade its testing capabilities and install trained personnel to facilitate
this process. Most importantly, the FCC has completed a complete
self-examination, developed a restructuring plan, and is poised to begin the
process of implementing critical reorganization changes.
On January 17,
2002, the FCC sent the cornerstone of its improvement plan to this committee-a
Section 605 Report detailing the reorganization of the Commission. The
reorganization is more then just a retooling of an old agency-it represents an
important step in streamlining the FCC. It is built along four important
concepts: (1) a clear substantive policy vision; (2) a pointed emphasis on
management; (3) an extensive training and development program; and (4)
organizational restructuring.
The FCC has articulated specific areas for
policy-making emphasis:
broadband deployment, competition
policy, spectrum policy, building a foundation for media ownership regulation,
digital television transition and homeland security. The Commission's policy
emphasis also have a new sense of purpose since September 11, 2001. Everyone has
seen the critical importance of a healthy and competitive communications system-
both in times of national crisis, and in times of peace. With the funds
requested for Fiscal Year 2003, the FCC will continue its important work in
ensuring a dynamic regulatory environment that facilitates the development and
deployment of new technologies and services for all Americans.
Mr.
Chairman, Ranking Minority Member, and Members of the Subcommittee, I appreciate
this opportunity to appear before you today to provide you with a report of our
work conducted during the past calendar year and to discuss the Federal
Communications Commission's ("FCC") Fiscal Year 2003 Budget.
Less than
nine months ago, I appeared before this Subcommittee for the first time and made
a personal commitment to effectuate fundamental change within the Commission. I
guaranteed that the Commission, as an institution, would complete a thorough
self- examination and develop a reform plan designed to make the FCC a more
responsive, efficient and effective agency, capable of facing the technological
and economic opportunities and challenges of the new millennium. The Commission
delivered on this promise and sent you a reprogramming request for its
reorganization six months later. We appreciate your rapid consent to our
request.
I also pledged to enhance the Commission's independent
technical and engineering expertise. The Commission dedicated resources to
recruiting, training and retaining a solid technology-oriented workforce under
our "Excellence in Engineering" Program. We have hired 18 mid- and senior-level
and five entry-level engineers. We instituted training programs to keep current
and future engineers up to date in their profession. And, we have improved the
environment for engineers by purchasing equipment to facilitate the spectrum
management process, and to upgrade the Columbia, Maryland Laboratory's testing
capabilities. Our on-going efforts in this regard, coupled with the Agency's
"FCC University" and "Excellence in Economic Analysis" initiatives, hopefully
will preserve our existing wealth of FCC staff knowledge and expertise and
enhance and extend that collective knowledge into the new millennium.
When I last appeared before this Subcommittee, I pledged to make the
Commission a model of solid management techniques and performance. As such, the
Commission moved forward to continue to streamline agency processes and
procedures, automate agency processes, provide improved access to agency
information, and modernize its information technology infrastructure. During our
January 2002 Open Agenda Meeting, the Commission's staff delivered with
statistics showing substantial improvement in backlog reduction levels and other
management benchmarks.
Finally, I also vowed that the Commission would
use the remainder of its Fiscal Year 2001 and expected Fiscal Year 2002 funds to
implement its statutory mandates and serve as a constructive and fair
independent agency, cognizant of the intent of Congress and dedicated to serving
the public interest and consumer welfare. I am confident that the Commission has
met all of these commitments and, in doing so, has achieved significantly higher
levels of customer benefit and policy and management performance.
The
Commission has made these achievements, however, against the backdrop of tragic
and dramatic national events. The events of September 11, 2001, provided us all
with an important lesson in the significance of the FCC's portfolio. We know now
that our society has developed more than just an appetite for communications
services-America is dependent upon these services in times of crisis and in
times of peace. A strong and competitive communications network is essential to
a healthy economy and our nation depends on both, whether to bolster its ability
to defend itself, or to communicate in times of normalcy.
Last year,
this Subcommittee initially provided the Commission with full funding, plus
additional resources for the "Excellence in Engineering" Program. Although our
final funding was slightly less than originally requested, I am appreciative of
this Subcommittee's efforts to ensure that we had adequate resources to achieve
our goals and effectuate significant intraagency reform efforts. For Fiscal Year
2003, the Commission is requesting $278,092,000, of which $268,327,000 will be
dedicated toward our operational requirements.
This year, you have my
personal pledge to continue driving forward in a patient and deliberate
manner-to handle the expected and the unexpected, from homeland and internal
security to biennial reviews, an expected influx of Section 271 long-distance
applications, and pending major merger reviews, just to name a few. The
Commission intends to use its expected funding to continue its campaign to
upgrade the Agency's facilities, as well as to initiate and complete critical
rulemakings. The present request is the minimum amount necessary to continue to
capitalize our past successes and to carry us through the immense challenges of
the next fiscal year. Already, Fiscal Year 2002 has been marked by a tidal wave
of expected and unexpected events and policy and regulatory issues. I expect
Fiscal Year 2003 to be at least as opportune and challenging.
FISCAL
YEAR 2002: MAXIMIZING AVAILABLE RESOURCES
It is fitting that we have
this hearing on March 7th, a day marked by important historical milestones for
the telecommunications industry. On this day in 1876, Alexander Graham Bell
received a patent for the telephone. Fifty years later on the same day, the
first successful transatlantic radiotelephone conversation took place between
London and New York. In retrospect, 50 years seems like a very long period of
time between these achievements. Today, we develop new communications products
and services at a more rapid speed then ever before, in an exponential fashion
that makes science fiction a matter of science fact within just a handful of
years. Looking forward, that makes for policy and management opportunities, as
well as hurdles and challenges.
As a consequence, the Commission
continues to capitalize on its well-established core competencies, especially
honed over the past six years, to eliminate barriers to entry in domestic
communications markets; to deregulate where appropriate to promote competition;
to vigorously enforce Commission rules so that corporate entities compete
fairly; and, to promote competition in international communications markets.
Moreover, the Commission continues to build upon the cornerstone principles of
the public interest and general consumer welfare to promote access for all
Americans to communications service, and to promote heightened consumer
education and information.
The Commission must stay abreast of
technological advances and be prepared to face the future before the future
arrives. To do so, the Commission needs funding to improve its use of internal
technology and to develop a highly trained workforce to evaluate communications
industry trends. Last year when I appeared before you, I discussed the
Commission's critical need to upgrade its infrastructure. I also emphasized our
efforts to re-evaluate the Agency and develop a business plan to reform its
organizational structure. A well-funded infrastructure and an efficient
organizational structure are intrinsically linked. The overall ability of the
Commission to function as an institution is dependent upon the quality of both.
When I last testified, we already had made strides toward upgrading information
technology and technological resources. Six months after my testimony, I sent
you a report outlining a significant internal reorganization of the Commission.
The foundation for the Commission's reorganization rests on the
shoulders of its staff-a diverse and committed group of people dedicated to
utilizing resources to maximum capacity and rebuilding a trim, well-focused
organization that meets the needs of America's communications industries and
their consumers. The reform and reorganization of the Commission is built along
four specific concepts: (1) a clear substantive policy vision; (2) a pointed
emphasis on management; (3) an extensive training and development program; and
(4) organizational restructuring. The implementation of each of these concepts
exemplifies how the Commission utilized its financial resources during the past
year, and explains our plans for additional funding in Fiscal Year 2003.
A Clear Policy Vision
I enumerated above a set of policy and
management imperatives that will extend the Commission's mission, evolve its
operational strategies, and drive further the culture of efficient, effective
and responsive performance. First, we articulated a clear policy vision. The
Commission's staff also evaluated our activities in these identified issue areas
and tied the highlighted policies to the reform of the Commission as an
institution. We initially specified several areas for policy-making emphasis:
broadband deployment, competition policy, spectrum policy,
building a foundation for media ownership regulation, digital television
transition, and homeland security. Although these issues sometimes overlap,
their individual significance guides our dedication of resources in the
regulatory arena.
Broadband
Recently, I noted that one of the
FCC's central policymaking focuses is, and should be, the promotion of
efficient, widespread deployment of broadband infrastructure. Recognizing the
importance of
broadband deployment-a topic of conversation that
is extensively discussed here on Capitol Hill, as well as at the Commission,
Wall Street, and Main Street-the Commission is taking a concerted, comprehensive
approach to bring regulatory clarity to what is, at best, a murky and confusing
policy area. To that end, the Commission has committed significant resources to
consider and initiate several proceedings that pointedly address broadband
issues. Of course, our actions in this area will first and foremost be grounded
in the Act, taking into account the statutory objectives of competition,
universal service, and consumer protection.
It is important to emphasize
that while we have committed significant resources to initiating or completing
various rulemakings, the legal and regulatory issues implicated here have yet to
be resolved. But they must be resolved if we collectively intend to facilitate
the ubiquitous availability of broadband to all Americans. The Commission
welcomes the input of all Americans in our deliberative process-especially the
opinions of the Members of this Subcommittee and Congress as a whole-as we
proceed in developing a regulatory framework for successful
broadband
deployment. Competition Polite
Competition is a
fundamental and guiding statutory principle under the Telecommunications Act of
1996. It is the root from which most of our other policy areas grow. Under my
leadership, the Commission has been outspoken in its support for competition,
both inter- and inter-modal. More significantly, however, our actions have
backed up our words.
Positive rules to promote competitive entry are
meaningless without a credible enforcement effort to back them up. Therefore, we
have made enforcement the cornerstone of our competition policy. As you will
recall, last year we called on Congress to increase dramatically the forfeiture
amount allowed under the statute. While we eagerly await the fulfillment of this
request, we have vigorously enforced our rules that serve to promote
competition. In addition, in contemplating our competition policy, we recognized
that ensuring that competitors have access to those network elements that are
necessary to provide competing telecommunications services is only half the
battle. Indeed, the competitive local exchange carrier ("CLEC") community told
us that to be useful, network elements must be provisioned in a timely manner.
In response to provisioning concerns, we launched two Notice of Proposed
Rulemakings on performance standards. Through these proceedings, we have
embarked on an effort to simplify performance levels and standards to both
clarify obligations and to allow for a mechanism for swift enforcement when
those levels and standards are compromised.
Moreover, the Commission has
been vigilant in its review of Section 271 applications. Since passage of the
1996 Act, the Commission has denied as many Section 271 applications (this
includes situations where the application has been withdrawn, an effective
denial) as it has granted. In 2001, despite the fact that the roadmap for
approval has been drawn, two Section 271 applications involving three states
were withdrawn, demonstrating the Commission's continued determination in
ensuring the competitive checklist is met and local markets are open for
competition. Furthermore, the Commission has begun a second analytical look at
the regulatory implementation of the Act, through our Triennial Review of
Unbundled Network Elements Requirements NPRM, that takes account of market
experiences to determine which of our regulations are working to provide a
competitive environment for consumers and which are not.
Spectrum Policy
The Commission's first assigned task in 1934 was to manage the spectrum.
The same basic principles articulated then continue to exist today. The
Commission has an obligation to ensure that spectrum, an important and precious
resource, is used in a wisely manner that ensures the broadest public benefit
and meets urgent public needs.
The Commission has acted
decisively-utilizing our staff and the spectrum auctions process to follow
Congress' mandate that we work toward the rapid deployment of spectrum. During
the past few months, we have reallocated the spectrum used for channels 52-59,
designated the 4.9 GHz band for public safety purposes, and authorized the use
of spectrum for Ultra-Wideband technology. In a major rulemaking completed on
December 28, 2001, the Commission reallocated 27 MHz of spectrum transferred
from the Federal Government. This spectrum will permit the initiation of new and
flexible services-for example, in the fixed satellite service, fixed mobile
service, telemetry, and low power radio. In addition, the
Commission has
experimented with innovative methods for licensing that encourage private band
management within the confines of existing statutory guidelines.
Media
Ownership Foundation
The time has come to rebuild the factual
foundations that support a contemporary regulatory regime for media ownership
regulations. Although the media landscape has changed dramatically since the
initiation of many of the Commission's ownership regulations, the long standing
goals of diversity, competition, and localism remain paramount.
As you
are aware, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit recently vacated some
of the Commission's broadcast ownership rules, and has remanded others for our
reconsideration. At the heart of the court's concern is the ability of the
Commission to justify these restrictions in light of the dynamic changes in
today's marketplace.
Long before the recent court decision, however, I
expressed concern about the quality of the record the Commission relied on in
reaching media ownership decisions. In an effort to shore up this area, I
announced the creation of a Media Ownership Working Group on October 29, 2001.
This working group is tasked with developing a solid factual and analytical
foundation for media ownership regulation. Moreover, they are working to provide
an empirical and analytical basis for the Commission to ensure that our
regulatory regime in this area actually serves to meet the goals of diversity,
localism, and competition in the media marketplace.
It is important to
note, however, that the D.C. Circuit's recent decision found that the Act
compels the Commission to review the full panoply of media ownership regulations
every two years and to repeal these regulations unless the Commission makes an
affirmative finding that the rules are necessary to serve the public interest.
To address the court's criticism that we lack a factual foundation for our
ownership rules, we must expend a meaningful amount of resources to improve the
evidence before us. We cannot afford to sit back and hope the public submits all
the information we need to make good decisions. We must be proactive in deciding
what questions need to be answered, and then to go out and answer them. That is
what I have set up the Media Ownership Working Group to do.
We then need
to apply those factual findings to our media ownership rules and determine if
the rules as written truly promote competition, diversity and localism, or
whether today's media market requires different approaches. I welcome that
challenge and would simply note that overhauling our knowledge base on media
ownership and then re-initializing it every two years hence will require a
significant commitment of resources.
In addition to appointing specific
FCC personnel to gather empirical information, the Commission has launched a
comprehensive examination of rules on multiple ownership of local radio stations
and set interim policies to resolve pending radio transfer applications. The
Commission also, as recommended by the prior Commission, initiated a proceeding
to review the newspaper- broadcast cross-ownership rule. The Commission also
began a rulemaking on cable ownership rules last year. In addition, the
Commission has proposed new equal employment opportunity rules for broadcast and
cable. I believe that by next year, with the proper allocation of resources
within the Commission, I will be able to report on significant beneficial
progress in this area.
Digital Television Transition
While
broadband deployment and the inherent competitive issues
involved rank as the most important communications issues facing America, the
economic by-products of digital television ("DTV") are equally important in
scope and stature. Television is, after all, a central part of our society and
provides our citizenry with essential information and entertainment.
Consequently, the DTV transition and its economic and regulatory implications
maintain an important place in the Commission's overall policy- making efforts.
In October 2001, I announced the creation of a Digital Television Task Force.
This task force will review the ongoing transition to DTV, and make
recommendations to the Commission concerning priorities to facilitate the
transition and promote the rapid recovery of broadcast spectrum for other uses.
In addition to making recommendations for agency action, the Task Force has been
facilitating discussions with the various industries that are largely
responsible for the transition.
Homeland Security
In response to
the events of September 11, 2001, the Commission established a Homeland Security
Policy Council ("HSPC"). The formation of the HSPC and its work involves the use
of significant resources in an area that we did not consider for budgetary
purposes during the Fiscal Year 2002 appropriations process. Like other
agencies, we are using our current pool of Full-Time Employees ("FTEs") to cope
with the events of September 11, 2001, and we are demanding more of them in
handling their regular workload along with new tasks.
HSPC is assigned
to handle overlapping security issues and respond to specific mission
objectives. First, the mission of this group is to assist the Commission in
evaluating and strengthening measures for protecting U.S. telecommunications,
broadcast and other communications infrastructure and facilities from further
terrorist attacks. Second, HSPC assists the Commission in ensuring rapid
restoration of U.S. telecommunications, broadcast, and other communications
infrastructure and facilities after disruption by a terrorist threat or attack.
Third, HSPC assists the Commission in ensuring that public safety, public
health, and other emergency and defense personnel have effective communications
services available to them in the immediate aftermath of any terrorist attack
within the United States.
Emphasis on Management
As an outgrowth
of the Commission's self-examination and reform, the Commission has placed a new
emphasis on the management of available resources and the creation of tools
designed to enhance the operation of the bureaus. We asked all managers to
review their internal processes and develop real solutions to existing problems.
Specified management initiatives include: (1) backlog reduction; (2) better use
of technology, including a re-designed Internet site; (3) improved productivity;
and (4) consolidated and simplified licensing systems.
At our January
2002 Open Agenda Meeting, most Bureau and Office Chiefs reported on their
reduction in regulatory backlogs-a matter that has dogged the Commission. We
have posted these statistics on the Commission's Internet site
(<"label="http://www.fcc.gov>">), so that our progress in this area is
evident to the industry. One major highlight in this area is the Wireless
Telecommunications Bureau. In 1998, they had a 13.12 percent backlog of
applications pending for more then a year. By December 2001, that percentage had
dropped to 0.24 percent. Likewise, the International Bureau managed to achieve a
55 percent reduction in pending applications for Review and Petitions for
Reconsideration, as well as a 56 percent reduction in the number of existing
non-routine applications and a 25 percent reduction in existing satellite space
station applications.
This past year, the Commission's management
maximized improved information technology resources to increase responsiveness
to consumers. The FCC's redesigned Internet site is part of our management plan
to make the Agency more responsive and transparent. We average approximately
265,000 hits on a daily basis, and we were ranked third overall among federal
agencies for Internet site design. At the end of November 2001, the Commission
launched a new FCC search engine to improve its Internet site.
In
addition to a general managerial emphasis on outreach, the Commission's staff
leadership is tasked with improving bureau productivity. For instance, the
Commission instituted comprehensive accounting and reporting reform for
incumbent local exchange carriers. And, in an effort to reach out to our core
constituencies, the bureaus have all undertaken efforts designed to consolidate
and simplify licensing systems. The Commission has proposed new procedures to
increase the efficiency of satellite licensing procedures. The Commission also
has proposed a uniform system for filing informal complaints. This particular
change would promote efficiency and predictability for consumers and service
providers.
Training and Development
The Commission's long-term
policy objectives require a highly trained staff capable of adapting to
technological change and industry trends. Accordingly, the Commission has
instituted a range of training and technical initiatives: (1) the "FCC
University"; (2) the "Excellence in Engineering" Program to recruit engineers
and improve their physical resources; and (3) recruitment and retainment of
economic experts, or the so-called "Excellence in Economic Analysis" Program.
Already we have instituted internal training programs in a variety of
areas and brought outside experts in to train our staff in various disciplines.
The most successful element of this program so far, however, is the FCC's
"Excellence in Engineering" Program, initiated during the previous fiscal year
and continued with funds in our Fiscal Year 2002 appropriation. Already we have
hired 18 mid- and senior-level and five entry-level engineers in open FTE
positions. We have instituted a special training program to educate and retain
our technological experts. We have dedicated a substantial portion of our
funding to improving the physical infrastructure used by the engineers for
testing and other purposes. At the Columbia, Maryland Laboratory, we have
purchased five new spectrum analyzers and three new signal generators to enhance
our ability to adequately measure emissions. As a result of these improvements,
we now have the capability to take measurements at 110 GHz instead of the
outdated 30 GHz level. We also have dedicated financial resources toward the
purchase of equipment designed to measure cellular phone radiation.
Restructuring
Although managerial goals and engineering
equipment are essential components of an efficient agency dedicated to high-tech
matters, the key to ensuring a well-functioning agency is to create an
organizational backdrop that maximizes human and technological resources. On
January 17, 2002, the Commission sent the cornerstone of its improvement plan to
this Committee-a Section 605 Report detailing the reorganization of the
Commission. We are in the initial stages of implementing that reorganization.
The Commission's plan is more then a simple retooling of an old agency-it
represents an important step in streamlining the Commission. Although there will
be no initial budgetary impact from the restructuring, we expect that in years
to come, the streamlining approach taken here will pay dividends in efficiency
and good management. I have attached to my written testimony a copy of the
proposed organizational chart for the Commission.
We intend to dedicate
the bulk of our human resources to continue to move forward in these areas, to
make the Agency responsive to consumer and industry demands and to facilitate
telecommunications growth and deployment. The best way to accomplish this goal
is to ensure adequate funding to purchase necessary equipment, improve our
information technology capabilities, and hire and retain trained technical
personnel capable of assisting the Commission in its decision-making process.
FISCAL YEAR 2003: CONTINUING A YEAR OF PROGRESS
It is important
to note that all of the reform and restructuring efforts started in Fiscal Year
2001 continue to be limited by the available discretionary funding in Fiscal
Year 2002.
Currently, 69 percent of the Fiscal Year 2002 appropriation
is earmarked for salaries and benefits. Additionally, 29 percent will cover
non-discretionary cost increases related to rent and supplies. That amount
leaves the Commission with two percent of its total appropriation to implement
reform - streamline operations, enhance technical and economic expertise,
oversee spectrum management, and provide funds for resolution of ongoing
enforcement issues such as cramming/slamming. For this reason, focussing on
improving the funding picture in the future i. e. , Fiscal Year 2003-is
especially important.
The $268,327,000 in operational costs requested by
the Commission for Fiscal Year 2003 is the bare minimum needed to allow us to
continue the progress made during the past year.In order to achieve our goals,
and stay abreast of telecommunications developments, the Commission must keep
ahead of changes in technology, economics, and the law. Accordingly, we are
requesting $15,066,000 for critical programmatic initiatives. An additional
$8,190,000 would be dedicated toward uncontrollable cost increases related to
salaries, benefits, and inflationary cost increases for rent and supplies. The
Administration's request of $9,765,000 for retirement costs brings the total
Commission Fiscal Year 2003 budget to $278,092,000. The Fiscal Year 2003
regulatory fee offset for the Commission would be 89 percent of the proposed
Fiscal Year 2003 budget, making our direct appropriation request from this
committee 9.5 percent over our total fiscal year budget, or 13.5 percent with
the pension costs included.
From the perspective of funding Commission
objectives, the critical segment of the overall budget is the $15,066,000
dedicated to programmatic initiatives. Of that amount, $4,986,000 will be
dedicated toward Commission employee training, enforcement, and spectrum
management initiatives. Due to national security needs identified since
September 11, 2001, the Commission also will spend $1,000,000 to improve
internal security and support other security efforts. The remainder of these
funds, $9,080,000, will improve information technology critical to supporting
program performance initiatives. With these funds, the Commission will improve
existing systems to ensure compliance with Government-wide standards pertaining
to system security, accessibility, and financial management.
In addition
to the policy objectives and reform outlined in my testimony, our specific
objectives for this funding include:
Continued expansion of
electronic filing and other initiatives to enhance public access and expedite
Commission policy decision-making;
Improved technical and
economic expertise of staff,
Life-cycle replacement of technical
monitoring and testing equipment; Ongoing infrastructure improvements to
Columbia laboratory facility; Expeditious and effective response to public
requests for assistance and information; Enhancement of information technology
infrastructure to make it responsive to changes in the industry; and,
Enable the FCC to improve its homeland security posture.
One of
the Commission's main objectives during the next year is to maintain a safe and
secure working environment for the FCC's employees and visitors who frequent the
Commission. As with most other agencies, the Commission has faced the fallout
from September 11, 2001, with unanticipated costs. This year we must provide
enhancements to a variety of activities and programs, including on-site physical
security; relocation and processing of mail at multiple off-site locations; and
systems upgrades to ensure that our information technology infrastructure has
adequate cyber-security safeguards. Although we have $1,000,000 specifically
set-aside for these projects in Fiscal Year 2003, the Commission also has
requested the use of excess regulatory fees collected in previous years for
Fiscal Year 2002 security needs.
In addition to receiving full funding,
we would appreciate a favorable decision related to this request.
Without adequate support, we will be required to eliminate some of the
Commission's programmatic initiatives, or cut back on the implementation of
individual programs. I believe that I already have made the hard choices
necessary to operate the Commission on as tight a budget as practicable. As I
outlined in the first part of my testimony, the infrastructure and manpower
initiatives are interconnected to the general health of the agency and the
completion of its core mission.
CONCLUSION
The Federal
Communications Commission has been using, and continues to use responsibly its
financial resources to meet the needs of a dynamic regulatory, economic, and
technological environment. This past calendar year, the Commission's staff has
handled a new workload based on national exigencies, worked toward improving
overall agency management, and initiated a restructuring process designed to
ensure that the Commission of today is prepared for the regulatory mission of
tomorrow. The Commission's budget request is a reflection of an imperative need.
We have trimmed the fat and focused all available resources to follow through on
much needed rulemaking matters, reform and restructuring, and other essential
programmatic needs. I respectfully request that this Subcommittee grant the
Commission its full funding request for Fiscal Year 2003.
Thank you. I
would be happy to answer any questions this Subcommittee may have.
LOAD-DATE: March 13, 2002