Stakeholders Urge FCC Caution on Spectrum Above 24 GHz

Spectrum allocations above 24 GHz that the FCC has identified for possible wireless use “present an important opportunity to open large contiguous blocks of spectrum,” but the commission also should continue to examine bands below 24 GHz since those are the bands where 5G services “are expected to emerge first,” AT&T said in a filing posted Friday. Most other industry stakeholders also encouraged the FCC in separate filings to proceed with caution on rulemakings for spectrum above 24 GHz. The FCC, in an Oct. 17 notice of inquiry, identified six sets of bands above 24 GHz for possible wireless use: the local multipoint distribution service (LMDS) bands, the 39 GHz band, the 37/42 GHz bands, the 57-64 GHz and 64-71 GHz bands, the 71-76 GHz bands, the 81-86 GHz bands and the 24/25 GHz bands. Reply comments on the NOI were due Feb. 17.

Spectrum between 6 GHz and 24 GHz “will continue to be essential to providing ubiquitous coverage due to its favorable propagation, which will enable country-wide access to advanced 5G services,” AT&T told the FCC. With 5G expected to first operate below 6 GHz, the FCC needs to first look below that threshold for available spectrum, AT&T said. The FCC should urge the White House to seek funding for 5G research and development, continue to seek flexible spectrum auction rules and refrain from immediately enacting technical rules amid nascent 5G standards work, AT&T said.

The FCC also should champion during the 2015 World Radiocommunication Conference in November allocating spectrum above 24 GHz for mobile use, AT&T said. Nokia said harmonization is necessary because the U.S.’s 5G research programs already are competing against programs in China, the EU, Russia and South Korea. “Establishing a common definition and foundational research base are key to making rapid progress toward 5G,” Nokia said. “Lack of coordination and cooperation will promote fragmentation and delay in vital standards work.”

Several satellite industry stakeholders cautioned the FCC to protect incumbents above 24 GHz. The Satellite Industry Association (SIA) said the FCC must reject any use of 5G above 24 GHz because such use “would result in the loss of critical services to U.S. consumers, and to vital enterprise users such as first responders and the U.S. military.” Commercial service using 5G “is years away and needs further definition before any technical rules can be developed to ensure the compatibility of 5G services with other services to which the bands are currently allocated and for which there is demonstrated need,” SIA said.

Iridium Satellite said the FCC needs to “make clear that existing military and public safety uses in the [LMDS] will remain protected as exciting consumer technologies continue to develop.” Incumbent public safety and national security users would likely face “insurmountable” challenges in coexisting with mobile broadband providers on the LMDS band, Iridium said. The FCC also needs to make clear that it will protect LMDS public safety users from “harmful interference,” Iridium said.

EchoStar encouraged the FCC to “move forward” with sharing on the LMDS bands by establishing a rulemaking on spectrum efficiency, which will allow LMDS operators more flexibility to provide mobile services on the band and allow co-primary use by FSS gateway stations. EchoStar said it believes the FCC should wait to make any rulemakings on 5G deployments above 24 GHz until 5G technology and standards are further defined. Some bands above 24 GHz are lightly used now, including the 37/42 GHz bands and the 24 GHz reverse band satellite service, but are likely to be more fully used in the future amid more regulatory certainty, EchoStar said.

ViaSat said it believes “that the time is ripe to revamp the sharing paradigm that applies” on the 27.5-28.35 GHz portion of the LMDS band and the 37.5-40 GHz portion of the V band. The FCC’s current designation of those portions of the LMDS and V bands as“gateway-type” satellites needlessly hampers the more-intensive use of spectrum that's "critically needed to increase the capacity of satellite networks and thus serve the needs of consumers,” ViaSat said. Sharing technologies can allow for new uses of spectrum above 24 GHz, ViaSat said, but 5G shouldn’t be included on those bands “without considering the existing services for which the bands are allocated.”

Samsung encouraged the FCC to proceed with rulemakings analyzing 5G implementation on portions of the LMDS and V bands, as well as on the 64-71 GHz band. Commenters have previously been unsettled” over whether the 64-71 GHz band should be licensed or unlicensed, requiring the FCC to look at the band separately from the LMDS and V bands, Samsung said. The commission should overall implement a licensed regime for 5G use of spectrum to promote investment and efficient use of the spectrum, Samsung said. The FCC needs to clarify its future regulatory framework in order for industry to develop years of existing 5G research into standardization, the company said. It’s feasible to share on spectrum above 24 GHz, but the FCC needs to collect more information on incumbents on the bands “so that the wireless industry can more accurately model the current and future uses of candidate bands,” Samsung said.

New America Foundation’s Open Technology Institute and Public Knowledge said in a joint filing that the FCC should use the balanced approach” it used in its proposed Citizens’ Broadband Radio Service framework for the 3.5 GHz band in rulemakings for bands above 24 GHz. A balanced approach will allow for “an appropriate mix of licensed, unlicensed, and particularly hybrid approaches that ensure spectrum allocations promote opportunistic access, intensive small cell re-use, innovation, market entry, and competition,” OTI and PK said. The benefit of high-frequency bands like those above 24 GHz “will rarely be to increase coverage or truly ‘mobile’ use, but are “well suited” to enhance network density, OTI and PK said.