C-Band Clearing Plan Leaves Unanswered Questions
Though repurposing some of the 3.7-4.2 GHz band for 5G seems inevitable, the path via the Intelsat/Intel/SES band clearing plan remains littered with unanswered questions, an FCBA event heard Tuesday. Promised reimbursement of the cost of migrating incumbent users of the C-band to a different part would be useful but doesn't solve the problem of potentially higher operating costs year after year, said Michael Beach, NPR vice president-distribution. SES Senior Vice President-Global Regulatory and Governmental Strategy Gerry Oberst said the consortium is hammering out fine details, such as reimbursement.
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!
Beach said having to relocate broadcast operations from the lower C-band raises "a continuity issue." Moving to another satellite or a different frequency on the same satellite takes time, including a lengthy regulatory approval process, during which stations could be silent, Beach said. Finding a single frequency that will accommodate all NPR's downlinks is doubtful, he said.
Also in question is some alternative distribution method other than C-band, Beach said. Other bands, or hybrid networks, aren't as reliable, he said. He said, too, there are worries less C-band available for satellite operations will mean increasing the cost of C-band operations. Oberst said there aren't good spectrum alternatives, with the Ku-band capacity constrained and more vulnerable to rain fade, while Ka-band "is even worse" in terms of weather-caused outages.
Speakers said the FCC opening the C-band to terrestrial operations is a fait accompli. "After years of defending this band, we didn't feel we were in a position to say no anymore," given U.S. policy regarding 5G, Oberst said. He said a C-band draft order could come by Q2.
Oberst said the satellite consortium that would handle negotiations with terrestrial interests wanting C-band is being put together. He said Eutelsat indicated it would take part, and the group is talking to Telesat Canada, which has been critical of the consortium idea (see 1805040019). He said there has been "some real muttering" from satellite users of C-band in other countries about the plan, but that consortium members have been clear this isn't an approach that will be pushed internationally and responds to U.S.-specific issues.
Between April 1 and Monday, 4,897 earth stations in the 3.7-4.2 GHz band were registered with the FCC, according to the International Bureau Filing System (IBFS). A challenge of the registration process is dealing with all the granular technical information requested, especially when a broadcaster is using hardware many years old, said Cooley broadcast lawyer Christy Burrow. One big question mark is how the FCC will handle registration Form 312s that don't have all the requested information, and there's little guidance since few applications have been accepted and fewer still have been granted, she said. Given IBFS' "temperamental" nature, don't wait to start filing clients' registrations days before the Oct. 17 deadline, Burrow said. The FCC didn't comment.
The fallout of C-band earth stations that don't register depends on what route the agency takes, but could mean anything from not being compensated for expenses like filters to not receiving protection from terrestrial users of the band, Burrow said. "You could get wiped out with interference."