Monday, September 25, 2023 a t 12:51:25 P acific Daylight Time 

Subject: RE: IoT not es 

Date: Thursday, September 7, 2023 a t 11:26:10 AM Pacific Daylight Time 

From: Mike Bergman 

To: Dan Caprio, Benson Chan, WiJ e, Greg (HII-TSD) 

AEachments: image001.png 

A minor edit: I spoke with Veronica Lancaster, who is a member of the IEC Board and president of the US 

NaWonal CommiJee of the IEC. 

For context, the US NaWonal CommiJee develops U.S. posiWons on IEC standards and coordinates/delegates 

hosWng of IEC meeWngs. This is a bit different from ISO/IEC meeWngs under Joint Technical CommiJee 1 (JTC1) 

by the way. 

Mike Bergman 

Consumer Technology AssociaWon, producer of CES® 

m: +1(609) 865-4402 

From: Dan Caprio <DCaprio@providencegroupdc.com> 

Sent: Thursday, September 7, 2023 2:09 PM 

To: Benson Chan <benson@strategyohhings.io>; WiJe, Greg (HII-TSD) <greg.wiJe@hii-tsd.com>; Mike 

Bergman <MBergman@cta.tech>; Dan Caprio <DCaprio@providencegroupdc.com> 

Subject: FW: IoT notes 

Benson and Greg, 

Mike and I have sharpened our recommendaWons on the US Cyber Trust mark and the CriWcal Emerging 

Technologies focus in OSTP. The new language is below. Mike spoke to the head of the IEC who did not 

believe Paul’s proposal merited further discussion, so we decided not to pursue it any longer. 

Please let us know if you have any quesWons. 

Dan 

Dan Caprio

Co-Founder and Chairman 

1455 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Suite 400 

Washington, DC 20004

dcaprio@providencegroupdc.com

202 680 4538 

From: Mike Bergman <MBergman@cta.tech> 

Date: Thursday, September 7, 2023 a t 1:56 PM 

To: Dan Caprio <DCaprio@providencegroupdc.com> 

Page 1 of 4 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject: RE: IoT notes 

As edited--

Mike Bergman 

Consumer Technology AssociaWon, producer of CES® 

m: +1(609) 865-4402 

From: Dan Caprio <DCaprio@providencegroupdc.com> 

Sent: Thursday, September 7, 2023 1:12 PM 

To: Mike Bergman <MBergman@cta.tech> 

Subject: IoT notes 

1. Supporting recommendation 14.1: The IoTAB strongly supports the voluntary 

public/private partnership that created the US Cyber T rust Mark. 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/07/18/biden-harrisadministration-announces-cybersecurity-labeling-program-for-smart-devices-to-protectamerican-consumers/ 

The U.S. Department of State must prioritize committed to supporting the Mark program 

owner, FCC, NIST and members of the relevant private sector for each of the various U.S. 

Cyber Mark programs, in conjunction with the Department of Homeland Security and relevant 

other agencies of the Departments of Homeland Security and Energy, the IoT 

Federal Working Group, and industry to identify to and engage allies and partners toward 

harmonizing standards and pursuing mutual recognition of the US Cyber T rust Mark and 

similar labeling efforts. 

2. Supporting Recommendation 6.3: The Federal Government should establish an 

Emerging Technology (EmT) office within each of the federal agencies. The Federal 

Government should expand the mission of OSTP for additional focus on the Critical and 

Emerging Technologies as identified by the National Standards Strategy of May 2023 or 

similar curated list, with additional staf fing support as required for the expanded mission. 

The US should lead in the adoption and integration of emerging technologies into the US 

economy and infrastructure. Currently a lack of coordination from the Executive Office leads to 

siloed planning, policies, execution, suboptimal utilization of resources, duplicate programs, 

monitoring, thus limiting realization of economic, social, security and other values and 

benefits. 

There is a need to establish new and/or leverage existing FACAs to augment knowledge and 

expertise gaps. The necessary coordination and integration with the NIST (FWIoT and Global 

City Teams Challenge (GCTC)) protocols should be in place (i.e., IoT implementations involve 

the integration of multiple technologies, systems, and stakeholders). 

CET EmT is rapidly evolving, with transformational value, and unexplored opportunities. The 

list of Critical and Emerging Technologies is broad (AI, IoT, quantum, etc.) and some agencies 

may have some existing CET EmT interagency roles. Having OSTP in a leadership role, 

potentially convening interagency efforts, FACAs or other whole-of-government or publicprivate activities, will help steer government and private sector activities. coordinating and 

Agencies consider participating in a Community of Practice, like the Federal CIO Council 

Page 2 of 4 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

format, which, in turn, will serve to convene EmT officials across all agencies. This 

recommendation is in parallel to the supporting recommendation (below 6.4) on establishing a 

National Emerging Technologies (EmT) Office. The aim should be to establish new and/or 

leverage existing FACAs to augment knowledge and expertise gaps and a process for 

defining what EmT is and a list of EmT should do. 

Implementation considerations: Establish specialized capabilities (e.g., IoT , smart cities, AI, 

quantum, etc.), in each office OSTP as required. Use language specified in the Oversee 

Emerging Technology Act (S.1577, 5/11/2023) on advising on responsible use of emerging 

technologies; providing expertise on responsible policies and practices,collaborate with 

officials and coordinating bodies across the Federal government, and offer input for 

responsible procurement policies; and the identification of the official and provide a description 

of the official’s authorities and responsibilities to Congress. 

Potential barriers: Primary expertise in CET is in industry rather than government. 

Government lacks Agencies lack expertise on CET EmT and the resources/capacity to 

implement develop and implement a public-sector an agency strategy, develop policy or other 

associated support, practices, programs and actions. There is limited CET EmT coordination 

between agencies that leads to uneven treatment, policies and siloed execution. 

Supporting Recommendation 6.4: The Federal Government should establish a national 

Emerging Technologies Program Office within the Executive of fice of the President to ensure 

that the federal government, state, and local government entities can ef fectively plan, 

implement, and manage emerging technology initiatives across the United States. 

The US should lead in the adoption and integration of emerging technologies into the US 

economy and infrastructure. Currently a lack of coordination from the Executive Of fice leads to 

siloed planning, policies, execution, suboptimal utilization of resources, duplicate programs, 

monitoring, thus limiting realization of economic, social, security and other values and 

benefits. 

This office should be aligned with the Office of Science and Technology Policy to: 1) work with 

federal departments and agencies and with Congress to create bold visions, unified 

strategies, clear plans, wise policies, and ef fective, equitable programs for IoT and Smart 

Cities modernization; 2) engage with external partners, including industry , academia, 

philanthropic organizations, and civil society; state, local, T ribal and territorial governments; 

and other nations; and 3) ensure equity , inclusion, and integrity in all aspects of IoT 

implementations. 

The specific roles, responsibilities and interactions with the EmT function in the federal 

agencies and with states should be identified. There is a need to establish new and/or 

leverage existing FACAs to augment knowledge and expertise gaps. The necessary 

coordination and integration with the NIST (FWIoT and Global City Teams Challenge (GCTC)) 

protocols should be in place ( i.e., IoT implementations involve the integration of multiple 

technologies, systems, and stakeholders). 

Implementation considerations: Establish specialized capabilities (e.g., IoT, smart cities, AI, 

quantum, etc.), in each office. Consider alignment with the U.S. Chief Technology Officer role. 

Consider language specified in the Global Technology Leadership Act (S.__, 6/8/2023) for 

some of the functions, including: 

IdenWfy technologies that maJer most to US economic and naWonal security 

Page 3 of 4 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Assess US capacity with each, including manufacturing, workforce, supply chain, capital access 

and R&D 

Evaluate technology leadership relaWve to other countries 

Determine appropriate policy response 

Potential Barriers: Siloed execution and Lack of coordination from the Executive 

Office, minimal support from designated agency leadership, lack of branding, lack of 

coordination, stakeholder engagement, resource allocation, and performance monitoring. 

dropped 

These are the July speaker recommendaWon acWons that was discussed 

yesterday and assigned to you. The Paul Eisler presentaWon is found 

Host standards body meeWngs in the US to facilitate great industry and 

government involvement. He noted the need to address visa processes and 

restricWons that complicate foreign parWcipants entering the US, saying this 

resulted in fewer US parWcipants engaged and fewer like-minded countries 

sending representaWve here, and cited the specific example of example of 3GPP 

meeWngs being moved away from the US due to pressure from 

China. (Assigned to Dan and Mike) 

Dan Caprio

Co-Founder and Chairman 

1455 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Suite 400 

Washington, DC 20004

dcaprio@providencegroupdc.com

202 680 4538 

here- hJps://www.nist.gov/document/paul-eisler-slides 

Page 4 of 4