APCO Seen Most Likely to Seek Changes to FCC 6 GHz Order
Petitions for reconsideration, and possibly a legal appeal, are expected to the FCC’s 6 GHz order. APCO appears the most likely to file a recon petition and maybe take the agency to court, industry officials said. Commissioner Mike O’Rielly said during a Lincoln webinar he expects some to challenge.
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!
“It wouldn’t surprise me” if someone files, O’Rielly responded to our question. “That happens with all our big ticket items.” The commission “gets sued all the time,” he said: “The item was very well done. It’s something I worked hard at to make happen.” O’Rielly hopes for action by year-end on changes teed up in a Further NPRM (see 2005270018).
Federal rules require a recon petition within 30 days of an order's Federal Register publication. The order was published Tuesday (see 2005260025). Advocates of sharing in the spectrum point to AT&T and CTIA, and possibly NAB, as raising objections. All expressed concerns about the order, approved 5-0 in April (see 2004230059). APCO didn’t comment. The others declined to comment.
In April, APCO asked the FCC not to act on the order in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. It cited the risk of harmful interference to public safety agencies that use the spectrum (see 2004100047).
“While litigation is always a nuisance, the FCC should have few concerns about its 6 GHz order,” said Michael Calabrese, director of the Wireless Future Program at New America. “I have never seen a proceeding with more engineering studies in the record, or with a more fulsome discussion in the report and order about why the expert agency came to result it did. Courts historically have been loath to second-guess the FCC’s engineering judgments.”
The 6 GHz order will open up channels as wide as 320 MHz for Wi-Fi, O’Rielly said on the webinar. He expects an order making the 5.9 GHz band available for unlicensed use by summer's end. The 5.9 band “can be implemented right today for new wireless unlicensed operations” and is being used during the pandemic, he said. “6 GHz is going to take a little bit more work. It’s a little more complicated.” The FCC has “more work to do” under Chairman Ajit Pai, he said.
O’Rielly remains focused on licensed use of at least part of the 3.1-3.55 GHz band (see 2004090047). “That’s a tough negotiation with the Department of Defense -- they have a lot of radar services in there,” he said. The spectrum pipeline “is fairly bare” and the FCC needs to identify new bands, he said. “They’re all more complicated than what we already have done,” he said: “People say, ‘Oh, C band was really tough.’ … The next ones are going to be five to six times harder.” The C band got recon requests (see 2005270031) and Capitol Hill overrides may not happen (see 2005270034).
The FCC’s decision on the Ligado order (see 2004200039) wasn’t made “overnight,” O’Rielly said, noting he sought action three years ago. “We made a grounded petition and then people can judge that. … It highlights that these fights are going to get more difficult,” he said. O’Rielly said the FCC needs to do more on siting problems. “We have an obligation to bring wireless services to all the consumers in America,” he said: “We can’t stand by while a couple of communities are making really horrible decisions.” The U.S. needs macro towers and not just small cells for 5G, he said.
The FCC’s “historic” decision to allow use of 6 GHz “paves the way for faster, higher-capacity, and lower latency Wi-Fi, which is critically important to connectivity and productivity,” said Alex Roytblat, Wi-Fi Alliance senior director-regulatory affairs. “I remain optimistic that all parties to the 6 GHz proceeding recognize that this carefully balanced decision maximizes public benefit while safeguarding incumbent operations,” he said.
“I’m sure that most of you are tired of the term ‘race to 5G,’ but this is something our adversaries are looking to exploit for themselves,” said Rep. Susan Brooks, R-Ind., at the virtual 5GXConnect Summit, also Wednesday. “If we don’t work to lead in this race, China ... will dominate this space.”
The House member urged replacing Huawei equipment in U.S. networks, and opening the equipment ecosystem through open radio access networks. “We are now reliant on technology more than ever during this unprecedented pandemic,” she noted. Indiana is seeing 5G investment after designing a “predictable regulatory environment,” said state Chief Innovation Officer David Roberts.
Be real with DOD about the status of 5G deployment, urged U.S. Air Force Cyberworx Director Bill Waynick. “Most of us understand that 5G is out there, but it’s not quite out there.” Show uses rather than say it’s faster and a “game changer,” he said. Don’t abandon compression because users will find a way to max out 5G, he said.