8/14 FCC C-Band Reply Comments On Behalf of Public Interest Spectrum Coalition

New America's Open Technology Institute wrote and submitted reply comments on behalf of the Public Interest Spectrum Coalition urging the Federal Communications Commission ("Commission") to open up the 3.7-4.2 GHz band ("C-Band") for authorized point-to-multipoint fixed wireless services in rural, Tribal, and other hard-to-serve areas to immediately provide relief to communities that currently lack high-speed broadband services. The reply comments are the latest in a series of filings in this proceeding, and specifically respond to studies filed in the docket that show the promise and the public interest benefits of fixed wireless services being deployed in the C-Band. These reply comments are in response to a variety of arguments made in the initial round of comments, for which OTI also authored and submitted comments on behalf of PISC. An introduction and summary is available below:

Chairman Pai has made the rural digital divide a priority since the start of his tenure, observing that “[T]he digital divide in our country is real and persistent. . . . If you live in rural America, you are much less likely to have high-speed Internet service than if you live in a city.” In this proceeding, the Commission has a unique opportunity to unleash unused spectrum across the entire 3.7-4.2 GHz band as public infrastructure to facilitate the deployment of high-speed point-to-multipoint (P2MP) fixed wireless services in rural, Tribal, and other hard-to-serve areas. Rural broadband ISPs, tier two fixed ISPs, the nation’s leading technology companies, broadband equipment makers, consumer and rural broadband advocates all view coordinated access to unused C-Band spectrum as a promising avenue for bridging the rural-urban digital divide where national ISPs have so far failed to make sufficient progress.

The Comments filed in response to the Commission’s Public Notice demonstrate several key points:

First, the record shows strong support for the Commission’s proposal to authorize P2MP services to coordinate into locally-unused spectrum in the ongoing FSS portion of the 3.7-4.2 GHz band. Comments filed by diverse parties agree that P2MP operators have the technical ability to coordinate the use of unused C-band spectrum with FSS earth stations without causing harmful interference. Conversely, no filings contain data or evidence that refute the Reed Study’s conclusion that coordinated sharing among fixed point-to-multipoint (P2MP) operators and existing earth stations is feasible on every megahertz of the ongoing FSS band in a majority of rural, Tribal and small town communities (78% of the U.S. on a co-channel basis where 80 million Americans live) – mostly rural and less densely-populated areas where it’s most needed.

Second, although most FSS incumbents oppose coordinated sharing, they provide no actual evidence or data to suggest that the findings of the Reed Study are baseless or unreliable. The C-band Alliance (CBA) and the Satellite Industry Association (SIA) focus instead on either fallacious policy arguments (e.g., that rural areas would not benefit from more mid-band spectrum for high-capacity fixed wireless) or spurious technical arguments that are contradicted by Reed Study findings they do not substantively refute (e.g., that coordinated sharing on a co-channel basis would complicate or impede earth station repacking). Instead of enlightening the record with engineering data, CBA, SIA and a few other FSS incumbents cut-and-paste the same claims of catastrophe that they have been repeating for two years. Despite physics and math— and a long history of successful coordination among FSS and FS users—self-interested parties haul out a batch of evidence-free assertions as if the Commission does not employ engineers, or as if none of them will actually read the record in this proceeding.

There is no question that even the more challenging scenario of co-channel sharing among directional P2MP deployments and FSS earth stations is technically feasible using geographic separation. The only technical issue is the precise methodology the Commission should approve to determine interference protection on a site-by-site basis. Whether this methodology will result in a protection zone radius for earth stations that is closer to the 10 kilometers estimated by the Reed Study, or closer to the 150 kilometers asserted on an evidence-free basis by CBA, the reality remains that coordinating sharing can unlock enormous capacity for more affordable broadband in most rural and underserved communities.

Third, another canard repeated by CBA, SIA, and some other FSS incumbents is that coordinated sharing by P2MP in the upper FSS portions of the band will impede a repacking of earth stations in the upper portion of the band. In areas where geographic separation and directional antennas permit co-channel coordination, every megahertz of the ongoing FSS portion of the 3.7-4.2 GHz band is currently available today and will continue to be regardless of an earth station repack in the nearly 80 percent of the country where 80 million people live.

Some P2MP opponents make the related claim that coordinating P2MP fixed wireless deployments into the repacked portion of the band creates encumbrances that could prevent any future repurposing of the remaining FSS portions of the band. The reality is that the Commission has many options concerning the licensing status of P2MP (or other broadband uses) in different parts of the band and there is no likely scenario that should preclude coordinated sharing by P2MP operators. PISC outlines three different scenarios that would allow coordinated sharing of every unused megahertz across the entire 3.7-4.2 GHz band, each of which could result in different rights for P2MP (and potentially for mobile or LAN) operators.

Finally, we rebut the mobile industry’s late-breaking and ill-considered suggestion that the Commission abandon its proposal to authorize coordinated sharing among P2MP and FSS earth stations in the ongoing FSS portion of the band and instead conduct an overlay auction for the right to negotiate payments to FSS incumbents. Among other reasons, the public interest purpose of authorizing coordinated sharing of unused spectrum in the ongoing FSS portion of the band is to encourage more intensive use of spectrum that will not be auctioned or that will not be auctioned or used for many years. Moreover, an overlay auction would effectively make it impossible for the Commission to adopt a nationwide clearing and auction plan at a later date. An overlay auction would guarantee that vacant FSS remains so for many years. And after an overlay auction, the ongoing FSS portion of C-band would be populated not only by more than 10,000 earth stations—which would be authorized to demand payments to vacate the band—but also by a new set of incumbents with cheaply-purchased overlay rights. Both would need to be paid off to clear more spectrum, which after more years drag on would result in a balkanized, wasteful jigsaw of FSS and (presumably) mobile incumbents in the upper portion of the band.