Boeing Offers Some Support, but Carriers Concerned About Bidirectional Sharing
Bidirectional sharing, a top Pentagon policy priority, got some support in comments on an FCC public notice, launched in response to a requirement of Ray Baum's Act (see 1905010205). DOD sees bidirectional sharing as important to its future as it gives up more spectrum (see 1806250049). The department's concept is that under bidirectional sharing, federal agencies could use spectrum in remote areas that otherwise is going unused. Carriers and other wireless groups say any such sharing must be voluntary. Comments were due Friday in docket 19-128 and posted through Monday.
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.
Boeing, which does work for federal agencies including DOD and NASA, generally backs bidirectional sharing as long as the process is transparent and fair. “Regulatory certainty requires transparent processes and equal treatment of all licensees of the same status (i.e. primary vs. primary) in the same bands,” Boeing said. FCC recommendations should “should acknowledge the benefits of band-specific bidirectional sharing rules to account for the differences between terrestrial, satellite, and other mobile systems,” the company said. “Congress correctly surmises that such parity will spur investment and innovation.”
Federated Wireless said as 5G "nears, bidirectional sharing presents an opportunity to ensure that all spectrum users" can "exploit the technology and its benefits to the fullest degree possible,” in comments. DOD in particular will need more access to spectrum, the company said: “When troops arrive at a military installation for final training exercises in preparation for deployment overseas, the spectrum needed to facilitate the conduct of such exercises simply must be available.”
But the Telecommunications Industry Association, echoing Verizon comments (see 1905310059), said bidirectional sharing is only acceptable if exclusive use licensees have a choice. “Any involuntary use would seriously undercut the market-based expectations of spectrum users, would have a tremendous chilling effect on future spectrum auctions, and for federal users could have significant impacts on an agency’s ability to fulfill its mission,” TIA said: “Consequences would ultimately harm technology deployment.”
CTIA also said sharing must be voluntary. “Any successful bidirectional sharing framework must facilitate a 'meeting of the minds’ between Federal and commercial entities, thereby creating enforceable agreement terms, and sharing should not occur without full agreement of any affected party,” CTIA commented. It said 5G can’t be built on shared spectrum alone: “5G must be based on flexible, exclusive-use licensing as a primary model, or the U.S. will fall behind.”
Commercial and federal users need stable regulations, T-Mobile said. “Once spectrum is designated for commercial use, it is vital that the rules regarding use of that spectrum remain the same, particularly when providers spend millions or billions of dollars at auction,” it said: “Any legitimate concerns regarding spectrum use must be presented as part of the Commission’s rulemaking process. Last-second objections and attempts to change rules after the Commission’s proceeding has concluded will dissuade non-Federal users from devoting the resources necessary to promptly deploy spectrum in their networks.”