Wireless Carriers Seen Likely to Push for Reallocation of 4.9 GHz Band
FCC Commissioner Mike O’Rielly believes there will be broad wireless carrier interest in the 4.9 GHz band now that reallocation for wireless broadband is possible. Commissioners approved a Further NPRM at their March meeting, opening the door to major change for the band. O’Rielly told us industry hasn’t focused on the band in the past because the FCC never before considered reallocating it for wireless broadband. O’Rielly called the current situation “a mess.”
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
The proceeding will “examine whether that band shouldn’t be reallocated,” O’Rielly said in an interview. “It’s one of the suggestions. It’s toward the end [of the NPRM] and I think we made it fuller with the chairman’s agreement. Hopefully, we’re going to explore that.” O’Rielly noted no more than 3.5 percent of potential licensees are using the band. “That’s just not acceptable going forward,” he said. “Spectrum is at too much of a premium.”
“As this spectrum has been underutilized, we request comment on redesignating the 4.9 GHz band, wholly or partially, to support commercial wireless use,” the FNPRM (in docket 07-100) said. “Are the bases for the Commission’s decision in 2002 to allocate the entire band for public safety purposes still valid, or does the public interest now call for a change? For example, would the public interest be best served if this spectrum could be used for commercial applications, such as 5G, or would it be better to strike a balance between public safety and commercial uses?”
Previously the FCC sought comment only on allowing public safety entities to lease the spectrum to carriers. Commissioner Brendan Carr said during the FCC’s discussion of the NPRM he's “open minded” on changing the public safety allocation for the band. Public safety groups didn't comment.
“Public safety put up a big fight for this spectrum band 20 years ago,” a former FCC spectrum official said. “Yet even after all this time, the band remains woefully underutilized and past FCCs have only tinkered with possibilities. This FCC has proposed bold, meaningful action and industry will certainly respond.”
“The exact appetite for mid-band spectrum isn’t known yet, but if current projections prove to be true, and the 5G-driven IoT explodes in the beautiful way it’s supposed to, then the hunger for channels such as those in the 4.9 GHz band could be insatiable,” said Robert McDowell of Mobile Future.
The biggest problem with the band is that it's only 50 MHz, said Roger Entner, analyst at Recon Analytics. “While in the old days this was a lot, in the new broadband days of 20 x 20 MHz plus channels it isn't that much,” he said. In addition, carriers and handset manufacturers want to limit the number of bands a device supports for cost, battery power and size reasons. Having many small frequency bands in separate parts of the spectrum runs counter to that consideration. In the end, operator interest will be contingent on channel size.”
Doug Brake, director-telecom policy at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, said he's watching to see how much interest there is from industry. “The FNPRM is pretty wide open, and could go in a number of different directions,” Brake said. “Extensive sharing of the band would be difficult. It isn’t a ton of spectrum, and existing users are scattered. Plus, if the goal is greater scale with compatible devices to bring costs down, the success of a new entrant necessarily comes at the cost of the incumbent, even if device costs are lower. It is possible there is a balance, but it would be delicate. Half-measures aren’t likely to be impactful.”