Station Repack Meeting Deadline Questioned
Since the original estimate of the broadcast station 600 MHz repacking price tag was off, there's no reason to think the predicted time frame for completion is any more accurate, said NAB Associate General Counsel Patrick McFadden Wednesday at the Americas Spectrum Management Conference. There was also a clash over the 6 GHz proceeding on October's FCC member-meeting agenda. "This is a big step forward," said 6 GHz Coalition counsel Paul Margie of Harris Wiltshire.
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.
McFadden said with the additional $1 billion appropriated by Congress in March for reimbursement costs, it's hoped there won't be a shortfall. He said the original $1.7 billion appropriation won't be adequate, and it's not clear how inadequate that amount will turn out to be, with estimates of additional costs ranging from $300 million to $700 million. Replied T-Mobile Spectrum Policy Director Chris Wieczorek, the speed of 600 MHz wireless deployments and broadcaster repacking is going faster than expected. He said T-Mobile, with financial assistance and incentives, is trying to move broadcasters earlier than scheduled.
Asked about the close to 100 stations that have filed reports indicating they may not meet their repacking deadline, Incentive Auction Task Force Deputy Chair Hillary DeNigro said the agency's first step in each case is outreach to find details. She said in some cases, the station still expects to meet the deadline, but if there are significant issues, the agency can look at alternatives. She said as transition activity progresses, "there will be harder and harder problems we'll encounter."
Utilities Technology Council General Counsel Brett Kilbourne criticized the 3.5 GHz and 6 GHz band proceedings on the Oct. 23 agenda (see 1810010027). He said utility companies are worried about having difficulty in mitigating interference to or expanding capacity coverage of their 3.65 GHz operations because of the size of the geographic licensing areas. He said allowing unlicensed operations in the intensively used 6 GHz band "is going to be incredibly difficult." He said given the 6 GHz band's use also by railroads and public safety operations, it's "the last band you would choose" for spectrum sharing. Replied Margie, "We think we've cracked the nut" on protecting incumbents from interference.
Spectrum lawyer Ari Fitzgerald of Hogan Lovells said more unlicensed frequencies are needed, but the incumbents that could be affected, like the auto industry, are hugely important to the economy. He said if unlicensed swathes can be found in the 6 GHz band, that at least would reduce the need for unlicensed spectrum in the adjacent 5.9 GHz band. "It doesn't really help" when the FCC says the 6 GHz band is underused, since it's both heavily trafficked and there's white space that can be shared, said Wireless Innovation Forum Chief Regulatory Officer Mark Gibson. He said technical issues to be hammered out include the size of exclusion zones.
Dedicated spectrum for IoT networks isn't a priority for the FCC, said Walter Johnson, Office of Engineering and Technology chief-electromagnetic compatibility division. The idea of such dedicated spectrum presumes the agency knows what the market segments will be, which it doesn't, and allocating spectrum is a huge risk, he said. Also running contrary to the idea of dedicated IoT spectrum is the convergence trend, with networks increasingly unified to support multiple services, he said.
"We're certainly not dogmatic" about either spectrum sharing or exclusive licensing, Chairman Ajit Pai said. He said that decision depends on the band, the incumbents in it and how the spectrum is being used. Clearing a band for exclusive use might generate more revenue, but there also are practical matters of how quickly a band can be cleared, he said.
Wireless Bureau Chief Don Stockdale said concerns of increased spectrum warehousing as the agency makes more spectrum available for 5G are unfounded. He said beyond the thresholds that kick in if there's excessive market concentration, allowing an FCC review, there's the practical issue that as more spectrum becomes available, the cost of trying to acquire enough to disadvantage competitors gets ever higher.
The EU 5G action plan has commercial launch of 5G services in at least one major city in all member states in 2020 and 5G available in all urban areas and along major transport routes by 2025, but the EU is facing some spectrum and technology challenges plus the lack of a 5G standard, said Pearse O'Donohue, European Commission director-future networks. To facilitate 5G, the EC finalized its communications code that provides for longer spectrum licenses -- of at least 20 years -- and changes the focus of market regulation rules to encourage fiber rollout, he said. He said the EC wants to have a global approach to all bands, but global harmonization isn't always feasible.
“We have a lot on our plate," Pai said in response to a question about the FCC freeing up other midband spectrum, citing the 3.5 GHz and 6 GHz proceedings and the forthcoming high-band spectrum auctions.
There had been belief 5G wouldn't apply to mobile devices because of the need for so many antennas, said Dean Brenner, Qualcomm senior vice president-government affairs. He said antenna module technology has solved that problem and 5G phones will launch worldwide in the second half of 2019 in various frequency bands.