Export Compliance Daily is a Warren News publication.
Interference Testing Required

FCC Waiver Gives LightSquared Conditioned Go-Ahead

The FCC gave LightSquared on Wednesday the regulatory go-ahead that could allow terrestrial service in spectrum allocated for mobile satellite service. The waiver from the International Bureau comes with several conditions meant to allay interference concerns raised by GPS providers and federal agencies, which use neighboring spectrum. The waiver applies to rules that prevent MSS/ancillary terrestrial component licensees from offering terrestrial-only service. LightSquared plans to lease its L-band spectrum wholesale to customers that would be allowed to sell terrestrial-only service. The ability to provide the terrestrial-only service is widely viewed as a necessity for LightSquared’s service to succeed financially. The company is hoped to add competition to the wireless market.

Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article

Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.

LightSquared’s business plan includes several unique features that make the waiver “consistent with the public interest and the purpose of the MSS/ATC gating criteria,” said the order. Among other reasons, the waiver improves LightSquared’s “ability to rationalize the MSS L-band” ensuring that the L-band “is capable of supporting next-generation MSS and broadband satellite/terrestrial services that cannot otherwise be deployed in the L-band today,” said the bureau. It also said LightSquared’s business plans don’t satisfy the gating criteria, meaning the waiver is necessary for the service.

LightSquared is required to “help organize and fully participate” in a working group to study interference, said the bureau. That group will “focus on analyzing a variety of types of GPS devices for their susceptibility to overload interference from LightSquared’s terrestrial network of base stations,” technical steps to reduce interference risk, and recommendations for wireless service in the L-band that wouldn’t interfere with GPS, said the bureau. It said the process must be completed to the FCC’s satisfaction before LightSquared begins commercial service. LightSquared suggested similar conditions Friday (CD Jan 12 p11). A first report on the group’s progress is due Feb. 25.

LightSquared must ensure the market availability of MSS by making satellite service available over the entirety of at least 6 MHz of L-band spectrum, said the bureau. The company is also required to “promote retail availability” of devices able to work on both satellite and terrestrial networks at the same price as devices without satellite capability, said the order. LightSquared has already invested $50 million for this purpose and the condition won’t require significant new expenditure, Jeff Carlisle, executive vice president-regulatory affairs, said in an interview.

The approval came as a surprise to some who thought NTIA’s concerns would work against the waiver (CD Jan 20 p2). NTIA told the commission that several federal agencies had reservations about LightSquared’s ground-based service in the 1525-1559 and 1625.50-1660.50 MHz and the effect on the radionavigation band at 1559-1610 MHz used by federal and non-federal users for GPS and global navigation satellite system services. NTIA Administrator Larry Strickling is “pleased that the FCC has taken our recommendation and is requiring that the potential interference concerns be addressed before LightSquared begins offering commercial broadband service,” he said. “We will continue to work in consultation with the FCC, government agencies, and industry to ensure that any harmful interference concerns are resolved."

The GPS industry, which opposed the waiver, remains concerned about interference, U.S. GPS Industry Council Executive Director Michael Swiek told us. The industry will “proceed in good faith with technical issues, but doesn’t see a clear regulatory fix to law of physics as things are currently stated,” he said.

The commission “is setting up a process for LightSquared and the GPS community to work together to resolve the interference issue on an expedited basis,” a senior FCC official said. “We are requiring that the process be completed to the FCC’s satisfaction before LightSquared offers commercial service under the waiver.” It will help promote wireless services and LightSquared “would be a new competitor and entrant into mobile broadband with new sources of capital and a new kind of business model with results that consumers may find appealing,” said the official. “Having an extra player in the mobile broadband field increases competition and provides consumers with more choices.” CTIA and Verizon, who had voiced concern about LightSquared’s waiver request, declined to comment.

An AT&T spokesman cited a filing at the FCC when asked for comment on the commission decision. In the filing Dec. 10, the carrier said “rationalizing” the MSS band for increased terrestrial broadband could help meet the National Broadband Plan’s spectrum goal. But “any action the Commission takes on these matters should be done in the context of rulemakings of general applicability, with all the appropriate protections of due process and regulatory fairness they bring, rather than through individual licensee-specific adjudications or modifications,” AT&T said.

"The FCC’s grant of this application is an essential building block for our network as we build out to meet the rigorous construction timetable that the Commission has made a condition of our authorization and reaffirmed in today’s grant of our request,” LightSquared said. “To assure that its rollout of full commercial service will satisfy the concerns about the possibility of inadvertent harmful interference to certain GPS devices, LightSquared pledges a diligent effort to work with all interested parties in an open and comprehensive process to address those concerns."

The waiver doesn’t mention the $20 million LightSquared told NTIA it was willing to spend on interference testing. It’s considered a “concrete example of our willingness to step up to this requirement in good faith,” said Carlisle. The company expects the testing to be complete by June 15, the date of the last required testing report, he said. The waiver marks a policy win, partly “because it will solve a specific problem, but also because it will be model of smart spectrum management in future,” he said. The FCC previously has said LightSquared’s service must be available to 100 million people by 2012.

NTIA also had raised issues about possible interference with Inmarsat devices used by the government. While still a concern, the issues aren’t insurmountable, said Diane Cornell, Inmarsat vice president of government affairs. There has been “a lot of planning underway for a long period time,” she said. Inmarsat is prepared to be “actively engaged with its customers within the U.S. Government to address all issues,” she said.

"It is appropriate that on the day following President Obama’s State of the Union commitment to greater wireless service, the FCC approved the application for LightSquared to offer wireless broadband service using satellite and land-based spectrum,” said Public Knowledge Legal Director Harold Feld. “Services such as LightSquared are badly needed in a wireless market dominated by the two largest telephone companies."

Several groups have complained that the waiver amounts to a major change for the spectrum rules and should be taken up in a separate rulemaking or with the on-going MSS rulemaking on increasing terrestrial use of the band. The bureau said it declined to address the issue in a rulemaking because it’s a “licensee-specific waiver” and MSS/ATC rules weren’t modified.” The conditional waiver, rather than a rulemaking on the issue, is likely a better way to approach the interference concerns, said a satellite executive. Addressing the concerns requires “information on what the devices are and what the actual interference mechanisms are,” said the executive. Those issues are better worked out between the interested parties and a rule is not the best way to provide the kind specificity and technical detail that will be necessary to mitigate these problems, said the executive.