Officials: Flare-ups on DOD Spectrum Likely in 2026 Despite NDAA Veto Omission
Lawmakers and other observers said in recent interviews that Congress’ deal to pass the FY 2026 National Defense Authorization Act without language giving the defense secretary and Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman authority to essentially veto commercial use of 3.1-3.45 GHz and 7.4-8.4 GHz bands (see 2512080055) will only temporarily pause fighting between the wireless industry and DOD supporters over military spectrum holdings. Officials pointed to President Donald Trump’s memorandum last week directing NTIA to explore reallocating federal systems currently on the 7.125-7.4 GHz band to the 7.4-8.4 GHz band and other frequencies (see 2512190086) as a fresh indicator that the ceasefire will be fleeting.
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.
Senate Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee Chair Deb Fischer, R-Neb., who spearheaded inclusion of the military spectrum veto in the upper chamber's NDAA version (S-2296), told us she and other panel members will “keep working to make sure that we have the spectrum that's going to be necessary so we can complete” Trump's proposed Golden Dome missile defense system. She and other Senate Armed Services members previously invoked Golden Dome as a reason for exempting the lower 3 GHz and 7 GHz bands in the reconciliation package (see 2505220064).
“Many of the assets that are going to be needed for [Golden Dome], to get that layered defense system, are in those bands,” said Fischer, who also chairs the Senate Communications Subcommittee. “You have to be very careful when it comes to sharing [to prevent] noise that would make it more difficult to identify” inbound and outbound assets. The omitted NDAA veto language more closely resembled the original spectrum exemptions for the reconciliation package that Senate Armed Services leaders agreed to with Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Cruz, R-Texas (see 2506040078), Fischer said: “Narrowed language” made it into the final measure.
Senate Armed Services member Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., said he's also “continuing to work on” the lower 3 GHz and 7/8 GHz issue because the protections in the reconciliation carveout for those bands are “not as good as they should be.” There are “other avenues that we've got … to protect that part of the spectrum from the incursions that some people would like to do,” he said. “We're going to do everything we can to [ensure spectrum decisionmakers] clearly understand the threat to our national defense if they impede on” the lower 3 GHz band.
Senate Commerce ranking member Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., is likewise planning to “look at future opportunities” to address the military spectrum concerns the veto language tried to address because that provision “shouldn’t have been taken out” in negotiations. “If you don’t do the diligence ... it could turn into another space [or] commercial aircraft interference” situation like the public conflict in 2022 between wireless carriers rolling out commercial operations on the C band and the aviation industry over potential altimeter interference (see 2201180065), Cantwell told us.
Cruz: 'Favorable Resolution'
House Communications Subcommittee Chairman Richard Hudson, R-N.C., said the federal government “didn’t need that veto power” in NDAA because the president already “has plenty of input and authority over these spectrum auctions.” The lower 3 GHz and 7/8 GHz exemptions in the reconciliation package already struck “the right balance so that our national security interests were protected” while also opening up the law’s 800 MHz spectrum pipeline, he said: “We spent hours working with DOD” to enact what became an “elegant compromise.”
In a statement, Cruz said he “never agreed to give DoD veto power over spectrum auctions” as part of the airwaves legislative deal included in the reconciliation package, “nor would we [agree] to sideline NTIA as the federal spectrum management authority.” The “clarity and leadership” from Trump in opposition to the NDAA veto language resulted in a “favorable resolution on this issue,” Cruz said. “It is a reminder to all of us, though, that we need to be vigilant as the law is implemented.”
James Erwin, executive director of Americans for Tax Reform’s Digital Liberty, predicted there still will “be flare-ups in the future” between the wireless industry and DOD over reallocating military-controlled bands even though the NDAA compromise “calms things down for the moment.” DOD wants “to maintain a lot of fallow spectrum for strategic ambiguity so it’s harder to jam their” communications, but the military “could give up a substantial amount” while still doing that and operating their systems, he said: Now, the defense secretary and joint chiefs chairman are “forced to play nice with the FCC.”
Michael Calabrese, director of New America’s Wireless Future Program, said Senate Armed Services members are likely to continue to be wary of the FCC and NTIA trying to end-run around the lower 3 GHz and 7/8 GHz carveouts by moving federal operations from other frequencies onto those bands, as Trump’s 6 GHz memo seeks. The exemptions bar only lower 3 GHz and 7/8 GHz from eligibility for auction. Calabrese, in an interview only hours before Trump issued the memo Friday, pointed to the 2.7-2.9 GHz and 4.4-4.9 GHz bands as ripe for switch-ups. Trump’s memo directs NTIA to study both frequencies for commercial use. Calabrese also noted ongoing concerns that the federal government may move the citizens broadband radio service off the 3.55-3.7 GHz band.