DOD RFI, Trump Campaign Pledge Raise Questions on FCC 3.45-3.55 GHz FNPRM
FCC Chairman Ajit Pai’s proposal for the 3.45-3.55 GHz band faces questions at the FCC as the Trump administration refocuses on a national 5G network and DOD seeks comment on spectrum sharing. Together, they raise questions about the FCC order and Further NPRM set for a vote Sept. 30 (see 2009090048), industry and government officials said in interviews. Some think Rivada Networks' campaign for a national wholesale network is playing a role (see 2008280061). Tuesday is an administration spectrum symposium.
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.
One of the promises of the Trump campaign for a second term is that the U.S. will “win the race to 5G and establish a national high-speed wireless internet network.” DOD asked Friday about dynamic spectrum sharing, of the same band that the FCC is reviewing, in a request for information. “While the Department has made available the 3450-3550 MHz spectrum band for 5G, are there new technologies or innovative methods as to how additional mid-band spectrum currently allocated to DoD can be made available for 5G faster?” the RFI asked. The FCC didn’t comment.
“Sounds like the DOD is having second thoughts, and I suspect such thoughts have been encouraged by powerful Republican operatives affiliated with Rivada,” said Phoenix Center Chief Economist George Ford. Rivada, which asked for spectrum to build a nationwide wholesale network, “has been relentless over the years” and was likely “encouraged by the success of Ligado Networks in wearing down resistance,” he said. “Analysts do not think there is a strong case for a government-owned 5G network, and such proposals have failed" before.
The RFI “will do nothing but slow the deployment" of "critical" 5G technology, said House Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone, D-N.J., and Communications Subcommittee Chairman Mike Doyle, D-Pa. “The plan appears specifically crafted to enrich” President Donald Trump’s “cronies and undermines the careful and complicated work done by the FCC and the NTIA to allocate this spectrum for commercial use.” Pai and other commissioners unanimously opposed 5G nationalization last week during House Communications’ otherwise contentious FCC oversight hearing (see 2009170068). “Worse still, our government appears to be backtracking on” Trump’s “commitment last month that ‘the American wireless industry will be able to build and operate 5G networks,’” Pallone and Doyle said now. “The confusion he and his Administration are creating will surely set us back.”
The proposal for a national 5G network “keeps popping up, likely because of strong lobbying efforts by the company that controls the technology and which stands to profit,” said Jeffrey Westling, R Street Institute technology and innovation policy fellow. “If a single company becomes a gatekeeper to the legal right to operate at different mid-band frequencies, they will be able to extract rents from every company who wishes to acquire those operating rights.”
Rivada disputed the complaints and said it’s not a “stalking horse” for Huawei as Ford claimed. “Rivada has never proposed, and does not support, building 5G networks with public money,” a spokesperson emailed: “We have always argued that private investment should drive 5G deployment. A privately owned and operated open-access, wholesale 5G network would accelerate investment in 5G, not harm it.” Rivada’s approach “would allow capacity buyers, not the network operator, to set prices based on supply and demand,” the spokesperson said. “We never ceased to be amazed at the willingness of supposedly serious people to characterize our business plans or technology without ever bothering to ask us about them directly,” he said: “Anyone who is confused about how Rivada’s plans to disrupt the entrenched wireless oligopoly should feel free to reach out to us.”
Mercatus Center Senior Research Fellow Brent Skorup would be surprised if DOD's raising questions about dynamic sharing has an effect on the FCC's proceeding. “The dynamic spectrum sharing idea has been around for a while -- it featured prominently in the NTIA's 1991 spectrum policy document … and in many government reports since,” Skorup said: “Dynamic spectrum sharing between government and private users is still at an early stage. It'd be great to see federal agencies use dynamic sharing technologies among themselves to prove the concept. Until then, the FCC is probably not going to view dynamic spectrum sharing as an imminent solution to competing spectrum uses.”
The FNPRM likely won’t be derailed, said Public Knowledge Senior Vice President Harold Feld. “There may be some additional questions added to the FNPRM to parallel other federal processes,” he predicted: “Federal agencies are eager to show that they are willing to work with the FCC on spectrum issues and aren't simply a roadblock to getting 5G spectrum out." Agencies run the risk of facing legislators' blowback "if it becomes impossible for the FCC to make any new spectrum available,” noted Feld.
Scott Bergmann, CTIA senior vice president-regulatory affairs, doesn’t see a disconnect between the DOD and FCC actions. “The RFI notes that DOD has already put plans in motion to free up the top 100 MHz, and the FCC will jump-start that process next week,” he said. “CTIA’s members are ready for an auction next year to expedite the deployment of mid-band spectrum for 5G and keep pace with our global competitors.”