LightSquared Interference Concerns Remain, Further Testing Not Necessary, Say DOD, DOT
A letter from the Space-Based Positioning Navigation and Timing (PNT) Executive Committee to the NTIA released Friday is raising questions about the FCC’s ability to allow LightSquared to move forward, said industry executives. The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2012, signed New Year’s Eve, which prevents the agency from lifting conditions on LightSquared without resolving Defense Department concerns, could be in play due to the letter, the executives said. LightSquared said the PNT process for review was deeply flawed and the NTIA should assert itself to take over the next testing phase. The PNT committee, co-chaired by the DOT and DOD deputy secretaries, works to “advise and coordinate federal departments and agencies on matters concerning,” according to the PNT website.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
The PNT letter, signed by Deputy Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter and Deputy Secretary of Transportation John Porcari, and addressed to NTIA Administrator Larry Strickling, voices continued serious concerns about LightSquared’s proposed services. The PNT committee said LightSquared would cause interference issues, while the Federal Aviation Administration found the “proposals are not compatible with several GPS-dependent aircraft safety-of-flight systems.” Those findings mean “there appear to be no practical solutions or mitigations” that would permit the LightSquared broadband service as proposed, to operate in the next few months or years without significantly interfering with GPS. As a result, no additional testing is warranted at this time, the letter said.
NTIA hasn’t received the report from PNT, said an NTIA spokeswoman. “In coordination with other federal agencies, NTIA plans to ultimately develop a recommendation based on our analysis of the data,” she said. “The PNT findings will help inform our final recommendation. Our analysis is still underway and we are examining the full range of scenarios so that we can make a final recommendation that is informed by the facts. We continue to work in consultation with the FCC, government agencies, and industry and we are working to address the issues promptly and conclusively."
LightSquared also sent a letter to Strickling Friday, saying “structural bias” within the PNT’s systems engineering forum hurt the process. That group, which was asked by the PNT executive committee to take up an NTIA request to validate the results of earlier testing, “intended to use this process from the outset as a means to harm LightSquared and benefit GPS manufacturers with whom it has inappropriately aligned itself,” the company said. As such, it said NTIA should take control to ensure unbiased testing.
Based on the DOD’s position expressed in the PNT letter, the NDAA may already prevent the FCC from moving forward LightSquared without a major change of heart from the Defense Department, executives said. The NDAA says the FCC isn’t allowed to lift conditions on LightSquared until it has resolved concerns of widespread harmful interference by such commercial terrestrial operations to DOD GPS devices. The NDAA also says the defense secretary will produce a review of possible GPS interference issues within 90 days. “The law is clear that the FCC may not act unless the DoD concerns are addressed,” said a spokesman for Rep. Michael Turner, R-Ohio, who added the GPS language to the legislation. LightSquared didn’t comment on the legislation.
LightSquared is throwing up “Hail Marys” now in its effort to build a legal case, said mobile satellite service consultant Tim Farrar. It “appears extremely unlikely to think NTIA or FCC is going to do anything different,” he said. The NDAA law is “pretty difficult to overcome anyway” and “at this point the best chance is to build a litigation case,” said Farrar: Whether the legal case is about “forcing people to take action or to seek compensation is still unclear and likely depends on what happens next.”