FCC Should Stand by Its Rules and Its 2020 Ligado Order

Ligado Networks submitted an ex parte letter to the FCC on November 16, calling for a denial of Iridium's petition for a stay of the Commission's 2020 L-Band Order. The long-delayed 2020 order approved deployment next-generation wireless services in valuable L-band spectrum. The Commission should deny the petition because it lacks legal support and there is no risk of immediate harm to Iridium.  

As Free State Foundation President Randolph May and I have previously explained, the 2020 order authorizing Ligado to deploy a hybrid satellite-terrestrial wireless network using its licensed L-band spectrum followed an extraordinarily lengthy, careful process. The resulting decision was informed by technical analysis by FCC staff engineers and based on agency rules defining "harmful interference." And it was fully compliant with the Administrative Procedures Act. The order contains tailored safeguards against potential harmful signal interference with incumbent operators in adjacent spectrum bands, including specific signal power limits and other remediation measures.

Iridium's stay petition states that its operations could be subject to interference from Ligado's network. It claims that its petition is supported by a September 2022 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NAS) report that reviewed the record in the FCC's L-band proceeding. Notably, no new testing was conducted for the NAS report. More importantly, and as Ligado pointed out in its responsive letter, the NAS report expressly relied on the report authors' own definition of "harmful interference" – and not on the Commission's rules defining "harmful interference." Thus, the NAS report made no determination about whether Ligado's network would cause "harmful interference" according to the Commission's rules. And, further to the point, the NAS report acknowledged that it was not making an evaluation of the correctness of Commission's decision in the 2020 order. 

 

Iridium's stay petition amounts to asking the Commission to disregard its own rules defining "harmful interference." But the Commission should stick to its rules as well as its careful decision from 2020 based on those rules.

 

Additionally, Ligado has publicly stated that it is not going to deploy its terrestrial wireless operations in the L-band while it negotiates with NTIA over these matters. Iridium is therefore facing no immediate harm. In sum, the case for a stay on the 2020 order is without merit. 

MEDIA ADVISORY: FSF's Seth Cooper Reacts to NAS Study on Potential Spectrum Interference in L-Band

The following statement may be attributed to Free State Foundation Director of Policy Studies & Senior Fellow Seth Cooper:

 

Now that the National Academies of Sciences has completed its review of the FCC's 2020 order that authorizes Ligado Networks to operate mobile-satellite services in the L-band, NTIA hopefully will constructively work with Ligado to identify any old equipment owned by DOD that might need replacing. The FCC's order from April 2020, which was based on careful technical analysis, anticipated the possibility that some older equipment might need to be replaced due to harmful signal interference and it outlined a process for handling that. Importantly, the NAS study expressly states that it was not an evaluation of the FCC's decision from April 2020, and it has no legal operative effect. Executive branch agencies and members of Congress should not overread the NAS study's statements or miss the key point that the study acknowledged that most commercial GPS receivers will not experience significant harmful interference from Ligado's operations.

NTIA and Executive Agencies No-Show on Federal GPS Devices and L-Band

On June 30, Ligado Networks filed a quarterly report to update the FCC regarding Ligado's exchange of information with federal agency GPS users. In an April 2020 order, the Commission authorized Ligado to deploy a mixed-mobile/terrestrial satellite broadband network using long-idle L-band spectrum. The order requires that federally-owned GPS devices potentially affected by Ligado's network are to be identified and then expeditiously repaired or replaced at Ligado's expense. However, federal executive agencies do not appear to be all that concerned about signal interference, since none of them have provided Ligado with any information about at-risk GPS devices.

Ligado's report states: "Despite our numerous requests, we still have not received any information about government devices that may experience harmful interference from Ligado's operations; indeed, we have not received any information at all from these agencies." The Department of Defense and some other executive branch agencies have opposed Ligado's next-generation wireless network, claiming in the press and in filings to the FCC that new operations in the L-band would interfere with federal users in adjacent spectrum. But if federally-owned GPS devices were truly at risk of harmful interference from Ligado's next-generation network operations in neighboring L-band spectrum, one would expect those agencies to provide information identifying those devices requiring repair or replacement, consistent with the requirements of the Commission's order. 

Interestingly, NTIA seems to be in possession of the sort of information that has repeatedly been requested of it. Ligado has discovered communications between NTIA and other executive agencies from 2018 indicating that NTIA asked for and actually received information about federal GPS devices from at least some of those agencies. Adds Ligado's report: "It is unclear why NTIA has never provided this information either to Ligado or the FCC as called for in the April 2020 Order." Passing that information along would seem be a simple task. But the withholding of that data by NTIA lends further support to the idea that no federally-owned GPS devices are actually at risk of harmful interference.

Additionally, continuing radio silence by executive agencies in response to Ligado's requests for information raises doubts about NTIA's credibility in representing the executive branch on spectrum matters and in coordinating with the FCC on spectrum policy. On March 30 of this year, FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel and NTIA Administrator Alan Davidson announced a new Spectrum Coordination Initiative that includes monthly meetings between the two agencies on spectrum policy and the establishment of a task force to update the agencies' memorandum of understanding (MOU) on spectrum coordination. The much-touted initiative, including an updated MOU, may yet bear fruit by facilitating a much-needed replenishment of scare spectrum resources for commercial uses, including next-gen wireless services. However, all the initiatives, agreements, and procedures for improving interagency spectrum coordination will seem like empty posturing if federal agencies refuse to cooperate with Commission orders and exchange information in good faith.  

Ligado Announces Plans to Commence Next-Gen Wireless Operations This Year

In a March 31 report, Ligado Networks informed the FCC that it will begin wireless network operations in the 1526-1536 MHz band on or after September 30 of this year. This is exciting news, as Ligado intends to provide "reliable and secure next-generation network capabilities to our nation's critical infrastructure industries." 

Back in April 2020, the FCC unanimously approved its L-Band Order, which authorized Ligado Networks to deploy a next-gen mixed mobile-satellite network using licensed spectrum in the lower mid-band range (1-2 GHz). This valuable spectrum has gone unused for years. But the Commission's order cleared the way for Ligado to provide industrial Internet-of-Things (IoT) services and private 5G network solutions for energy, utility, and other industries. The Commission recognized the potential for Ligado's network to benefit the public by spurring infrastructure investment, supporting advanced services, and creating jobs. 

Since the Commission approved the L-Band Order, Ligado has pursued commercial partnerships to deploy its networks. In June 2021, it was reported that Ligado raised $4 billion in private capital to develop and deploy its network. Also in 2021, Ligado announced it had received 3GPP standards approval for its specifications to deploy 5G services in its L-Band spectrum. And Ligado reported reaching a deal with Nokia to develop 5G base stations. 

Ligado Networks' March 31 announcement of plans to commence operations in the 1526-1536 MHz in northern Virginia is in keeping with the L-Band Order's requirement that Ligado provide 6-months advance notice to GPS providers in adjacent spectrum. The L-Band Order includes several safeguards against potential harmful signal interference to incumbent operations in neighboring spectrum bands. For instance, the order requires a 23 megahertz guard band between Ligado's downlink operations in the 1526-1536 band and GPS operations in the 1559-1610 MHz band. The Commission's also imposes strong limits Ligado's base station power levels. 

In all, Ligado's expected start for operations this fall is a step forward for America's wireless future.

Reps. Doyle and Latta Lay Out Plan to Reform Spectrum Management

Earlier today, on its "Congress Blog," The Hill published an op-ed penned jointly by Representatives Michael F. Doyle (D – PA) and Robert E. Latta (R – OH). Determined to avoid a repeat of the recent kerfuffle between the FCC and the FAA over 5G mobile operations in the C-Band, the two lawmakers set forth a four-element plan to overhaul interagency spectrum coordination processes.

As you undoubtedly recall, earlier this year the launch by Verizon and AT&T of 5G using C-Band spectrum licenses for which they contributed billions to the U.S. Treasury was impacted when, at the eleventh-hour, the FAA raised aviation-related concerns.

This occurred even though, prior to auctioning that spectrum, the FCC undertook a lengthy, deliberate, and engineering-informed process that considered, and addressed, potential interference.

Over the last few years, other disagreements regarding FCC efforts to repurpose high-value, underutilized spectrum similarly have played out in unprecedentedly high-profile fashion. They include the L-Band (vis-à-vis the Department of Defense), the 5.9 GHz band (the Department of Transportation), and the 24 GHz band (NASA and NOAA).

In "Aviation conflict highlights the need for spectrum management reform," Representative Doyle, Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Communications and Technology, and Representative Latta, its Ranking Member, expressed their well-founded concern that "declining faith in how these decisions are made is beginning to show signs of jeopardizing the consumer and economic benefits we've enjoyed for generations."

In response, the two laid out four principles that will guide their bipartisan efforts to "pursu[e] public oversight and restor[e] trust in the spectrum management process."

Those principles are as follows:

1. Reassert that it is NTIA that has the responsibility "to balance the needs and concerns of federal spectrum users, and to communicate those interests to its governmental counterparts and the public."
2. Promote "clear rules and expectations for federal and other spectrum users."
3. Ensure "that the government process for managing these critical spectrum resources [relies] on science and engineering …, not the institutional interests of a single federal agency."
4. Prioritize "the finality of [spectrum management] decisions."

Randolph J. May, the Free State Foundation's President, and Seth L. Cooper, its Director of Policy Studies and a Senior Fellow, made a number of similar points in "Congress Should Require Better Agency Coordination on Spectrum Policy," a February 15, 2022, Perspectives from FSF Scholars.

Specifically, Mr. May and Mr. Cooper (1) urged NTIA and the FCC to update their spectrum coordination Memorandum of Understanding to "expressly acknowledge NTIA's role in representing all executive branch agencies," (2) argued that "Congress should pass legislation to improve coordination among federal agencies," (3) noted with concern how the status quo "risks causing unnecessary delay and regulatory uncertainty," and (4) concluded that an improved process "could provide greater assurance to the public."

NDAA Markup Should Steer Clear of FCC's Careful L-Band Order

Today, I posted the following tweet thread about the FCC's April 2020  order approving Ligado Networks' deployment of wireless services in the L-Band and the September 1, 2021 markup hearing scheduled for the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2022:

1) U.S. leadership on #5G is more important to the future of the free world than ever. @LigadoNetworks' planned 5G commercial wireless network using L-Band spectrum -- which has @FCC approval -- will play a vital role in ensuring that global leader on 5G is America, not China.

— Seth Cooper (@CooperFSF) August 30, 2021

3) @FCC's order approving Ligado Networks' L-Band use followed a careful process. It complied with APA, factored public comments, used staff engineering expertise + GPS safeguards. @FCC's decision should not be thwarted by last-minute amendments to NDAA via an uncareful process.

— Seth Cooper (@CooperFSF) August 30, 2021

Ligado Networks and Mavenir Move Ahead on Next-Gen Wireless Buildout

As mentioned in a blog post from July of this year, Ligado Networks has been developing its mixed mobile-satellite wireless network, which will operate using its licensed L-Band spectrum. Once deployed, Ligado's network will offer 5G private network and IoT capabilities that will create jobs and boost the U.S. economy. To this end, Ligado has reached agreements with equipment manufacturers, and its latest announced partnership is with the OpenRAN vendor Mavenir. See Free State Foundation President Randolph May's tweet on this announcement, with a link to the press release: 

The announcement that @LigadoNetworks is partnering w/ @Mavenir to advance the connectivity of its #5G mobile satellite network is imp't, esp. now. The combo will support millions of mobile devices used in critical #infrastructure industries. See: https://t.co/4pwfsAUk6G

— Free State Foundation (@FSFthinktank) August 18, 2021

PRESS RELEASE: NTIA's Case Against Ligado Undercut by Agency Documents

The following statement may be attributed to Free State Foundation Director of Policy Studies and Senior Fellow Seth Cooper:

Documents from 2013 that recently have gained notice cast doubt on the validity of the Department of Defense and Department of Commerce's opposition to Ligado Network's use of L-Band spectrum for commercial wireless services. A July 2013 memo signed by Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee (IRAC) members of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Commerce Department, and NASA shows that at that time those federal agencies had no serious reservations about prospective use of L-Band spectrum by Ligado's predecessor,  Lightsquared. An October 2013 email from a Department of Defense official also indicates that those federal agencies were generally in favor of L-Band spectrum being used for commercial wireless services. This history undercuts those federal agencies' present pushback against Ligado's network, which will operate at significantly reduced power levels compared to what Lightsquared proposed, and subject to FCC-enforceable safeguards. The FCC's 2020 order that authorized Ligado to operate in the L-Band was based on careful technical analysis, and the agency documents from 2013 bolster the case for the Commission to reject any reconsideration of that order.

Goods Reasons for Congress to Object to the RETAIN Act

Today, I posted the following Twitter thread in response to a July 26 Forbes.com article by Diana Furchtgott-Roth about Ligado Networks and the introduction of the RETAIN Act in the U.S. House:

2) In adopting the L-Band Order, the @FCC was informed by its Office of Engineering & Technology staff and their expert analysis. The FCC’s careful decision includes safeguards for GPS + satellite services in adjacent bands: a 23 MHz guard-band, base station power limits, & more.

— Seth Cooper (@CooperFSF) July 27, 2021

4) Flawed RETAIN Act's blanket replacement mandate ignores the fact that some GPS devices receive signals using Ligado's licensed spectrum - far outside the GPS allocation. RETAIN ACT's blanket approach effectively would give third parties rights in Ligado's licensed spectrum.

— Seth Cooper (@CooperFSF) July 27, 2021

For more on what's right with the FCC's L-Band Order and what's wrong with the RETAIN Act, see my blog posts from May 26 and July 1 of this year.

The RETAIN Act Would Restrain America's 5G Future

In its April 2020 L-Band Order, the FCC voted 5-0 to approve Ligado Networks' use of 30 MHz of licensed spectrum for commercial wireless services, including 5G. The carefully tailored order included specific safeguards for GPS and for satellite communications services operating in adjacent spectrum bands. But a bill called the RETAIN GPS and Satellite Communications Act takes a slapdash approach to the intricate technical issues addressed by the L-Band Order. 

Congress should reject the RETAIN Act and ensure that 30 MHz of valuable spectrum finally gets put to economically beneficial use. Putting L-Band spectrum into commercial use is especially important to further America's preeminence over China for 5G services.  

The FCC's L-Band Order permitted Ligado Networks to deploy an innovative mixed mobile-satellite network that will offer 5G private network solutions to energy, utility, and other industries. The L-Band Order observed that Ligado's network could lead to over 8,000 new jobs. Moreover, it is reported that Ligado raised $4 billion in private capital last year to develop and deploy its network. On June 21, Ligado announced it had received 3GPP standards approval for its specifications to deploy 5G services in its L-Band spectrum. And on June 22, it was reported Ligado reached a deal with Nokia to develop 5G base stations. 

But the RETAIN Act (S.2166) would thwart Ligado Networks' commendable efforts to bring next-generation commercial wireless network services to the L-Band. The bill, which was introduced by Sen. James Inhofe, would require Ligado to buy new equipment for any and all GPS and satellite communications providers and customers that are impacted by Ligado's operations within its licensed L-Band spectrum. 

A major problem with the RETAIN Act is that it takes the kind of indiscriminate blanket approach to alleged spectrum interference issues that was rightly rejected by the FCC. In its L-Band Order, the Commission required Ligado Networks to replace government-owned GPS devices in the event that Ligado's network caused harmful signal interference issues with government users of adjacent spectrum. But the RETAIN Act's requirement that Ligado replace any and all GPS devices impacted by its network operations ignores the fact that some GPS devices receive signals using Ligado's licensed spectrum. As the FCC recognized in its L-Band Order, some GPS receivers apparently were designed to receive signals far outside of the spectrum allocation for GPS. The FCC sensibly concluded that protection shouldn't be extended to every GPS receiver operating far outside its allocation or to every poorly designed GPS receiver. However, the RETAIN ACT would quite unreasonably require Ligado to pay for and replace all such equipment. This would amount to giving third parties rights to use Ligado's licensed spectrum.  

Additionally, the RETAIN ACT treats one-way GPS and two-way satellite communications the same even though they are distinct services operating in different bands that present different technical issues. Significantly, in the L-Band Order, the FCC concluded that Ligado's operations, subject to certain emissions limits, would not cause harmful interference to satellite communications operations in an adjacent band. Accordingly, the Commission did not pre-determine responsibility for any other such potential harmful signal interference issues, and it nowhere mandated that Ligado buy new equipment for its competitor, Iridium, should any future signal interference issue arise. But the RETAIN Act effectively would mandate this result. 

In its L-Band Order, the FCC addressed potential harmful signal interference issues in a way that was fitted to concerns unique to each type of service and spectrum allocation. Yet the RETAIN Act lacks any such careful calibration. The bill seems intended to thwart new wireless services and effectively keep 30 MHz of valuable L-Band spectrum from ever being used. This result would cause a huge setback to America's 5G future and harm our nation's competitiveness against China. Congress should say "no" to the RETAIN Act and let Ligado Networks move forward with its next-gen wireless network, consistent with the safeguards established by the FCC. 

Four Facts About the FCC's Ligado Order

The following tweets by Free State Foundation President Randolph J. May respond to Sen. Jim Inhofe's floor speech on May 12 regarding the FCC's grant of Ligado's application of L-Band spectrum for its mixed satellite-terrestrial network:

Correcting Senator Inhofe's major errors, here are facts: 1. The FCC engaged in a careful deliberative process based on careful engineering analysis in considering potential for interference to GPS. 2. @FCC shared draft decision w/ @NTIAgov last fall so there was no surprise.

— Free State Foundation (@FSFthinktank) May 13, 2020

Further correcting Senator Inhofe's floor speech, 3. both Attorney General Barr & Sec'y of State Pompeo SUPPORT @FCC decision. 4. And FCC required @LigadoNetworks to mitigate any harmful interference to GPS IF such interference occurs.

— Free State Foundation (@FSFthinktank) May 13, 2020

MEDIA ADVISORY: Today's Senate Armed Services Hearing on Ligado

The following is a compilation of a Twitter thread by Free State Foundation President Randolph J. May regarding today's hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee on the FCC's grant of Ligado's application of L-Band spectrum for its mixed satellite-terrestrial network:

Senate Armed Services Comm. has every right to hold a hearing on @FCC grant of @LigadoNetworks long-pending license application to use L-Band spectrum. But it's disappointing the hearing is so one-sided. FCC based its decision on its technical expertise, and it should be heard. Because grant of @LigadoNetworks will further #5G deployment, it furthers a national security interest. There is widespread agreement US doesn't want to lose #5G race to China or others. I have confidence in the engineering expertise of @FCC re interference determination. To be constructive, focus of the hearing shouldn't be on reversing the FCC decision, but looking towards how FCC should implement mitigation actions IF needed after Ligado net is operational. I have confidence that @FCC has the requisite authority, and would exercise it, IF it turned out that adjustments to @LigadoNetworks license were needed as a matter of national security once Ligado's network is operational.

MEDIA ADVISORY: FCC Set to Vote on Ligado's Applications to Use L-Band Spectrum

Free State Foundation President Randolph May issued the following statement regarding Chairman Pai's proposed order granting, with conditions, Ligado Networks' applications to use L-Band spectrum:

Above all else, I'm pleased that Chairman Pai has circulated a draft order. For several years now, I've advocated that the FCC move ahead to make a decision on Ligado's long-pending applications. I've never professed to render any definitive opinion on the finer points of the various interference claims involved in this years-long controversy. But I know that Ligado has gone to great lengths to modify its plans to address claimed interference concerns. And have confidence in the technical expertise of FCC's engineering staff and the commissioners' willingness to take that expertise into account. So I hope the Commission now acts promptly. This is another FCC action that can advance the U.S. position with regard to 5G deployment.

Former NASA Administrator Daniel Goldin on the L-Band

If, like me, you have been following the long-running saga in which Ligado is seeking the FCC's permission to use the long dormant L-Band spectrum, you definitely should read the December 9 letter from former NASA Administrator Daniel Goldin to FCC Chairman Ajit Pai. Mr. Goldin's letter is here.

Please read the entire letter – the essence of which is to vigorously contest NTIA's position that Ligado's applications, which seek to deploy a hybrid terrestrial-satellite network in the L-Band that will provide “Internet of Things” services and boost America’s position in the global race to 5G, should not be granted.

In the meantime, here are a few key excerpts:

•      On 5G, we have fallen behind, and badly. Of most immediate concern is the lack of available, appropriate spectrum for our wireless carriers to deploy. I have spent countless hours educating myself alongside a team of world class telecom executives and spectrum technical experts on these issues, notably L-Band's ability to drastically shorten the timeline for the U.S. to deploy 5G and truly compete with China. I am convinced the technological and policy justifications for allowing this "Ligado" modification to proceed are sound.
• 
  
•     This 35 MHz is not just one spectrum option to advance 5G.  Properly understood, it is absolutely critical to a viable U.S. 5G deployment strategy.

•      Simply put, GPS is not at risk I have studied the record. I have worked with an unparalleled technical team, and over 5000 hours of testing has shown there is no harmful interference. Globally recognized experts continue to refute all claims alleging actual degradation of GPS devices.
• 
  
•       As  it relates to a 1DB C/N out-of-band standard for interference, I agree that we cannot and will not set this unprecedented standard. Doing so would result in the FCC having to revoke substantial amounts of other adjacent spectrum already deployed. Setting such an unreasonably restrictive standard would also have catastrophic consequences on future spectrum in the pipeline. It is possible to protect GPS and still issue the L-Band license modification order; we must do both.
• 
  
•   c Of course, historically, the U.S. has transitioned new spectrum many times. There is always a strong push to preserve the status quo.

I do not purport to be an expert regarding spectrum interference or other engineering matters – although I know a heck of a lot more in this regard than I did over four decades ago when I first began participating in and studying Commission proceedings. I have a high degree of confidence that the FCC's engineers possess sufficient expertise to determine whether Mr. Goldin's and others' assertions regarding the 1DB C/N out-of-band standard for interference are correct. The notion that, if such a 1DB C/N out-of-band standard is adopted the Commission would be required to revoke a substantial amount of already-deployed spectrum, is surely troubling.

While I do not purport to be a spectrum engineering expert, I do consider myself an expert, by dent of considerable practical experience and "battle scars" as well as scholarly study and academic endeavors, regarding the operation of institutional bureaucratic and "public choice" imperatives frequently at work in agency matters. The fact of the matter is that there are incentives for one party or another to use the available administrative processes to protect its turf, and spectrum proceedings – including those involving government agencies – are by no means immune from this "self-protective" phenomenon. As Mr. Goldin aptly puts it, "[t]here is always a strong push to preserve the status quo."

In this instance, I submit, for the reasons Mr. Goldin cites, especially including the need to make available mid-band spectrum so that the U.S. does not fall behind China (or other nations) in the race to deploy 5G, that it is very important for the FCC to reject the urge to preserve the status quo. The Commission needs to move ahead to act on Ligado's long-pending applications. As Mr. Goldin puts it, "the stakes are too high not to act."

It would be wrong, of course, for the FCC not to give due consideration to NTIA's views regarding impacts on the use of government spectrum, especially including impacts on national security. Presumably, the FCC already has done so in preparing a draft order, and if it hasn't, it should.

At the end of the day, however, the FCC is an independent agency that must exercise its responsibility, based on its presumed expertise, to oversee the use of spectrum designated for private sector use in a way that serves the overall public interest.

-->

FCC Should Green Light Wireless Services in L-Band Spectrum

According to reports, the FCC reportedly has prepared a draft order approving mobile wireless operations in unused L-Band spectrum. A November 18 letter by the Defense Secretary reportedly disagrees with the FCC's proposal on certain points and repeats views already known to the Commission when it prepared the draft. The Commission has ultimate responsibility over the spectrum, and the agency should be undeterred in approving its draft order so that long fallow valuable L-Band spectrum can be put into commercial use. 

It's important to our nation's economy and its quest for global leadership in wireless to free up as much spectrum as possible for 5G and other advanced mobile services. If approved, Ligado Networks' modified applications would put 30 MHz of L-Band spectrum to use, generating economic benefits potentially between $250 and $500 billion. In July 2018, Free State Foundation President Randolph May and I submitted reply comments in the Commission's proceeding, recommending Ligado's applications be approved. 

Ligado's modified applications to deploy a hybrid satellite-terrestrial wireless network present the FCC's best near-term opportunity to make available lower-middle-band spectrum for next-generation mobile services – including 5G. As research firm LightShed Partners has explained: "Ligado's spectrum offers incremental wireless data capacity, which is needed not only for the ongoing wireless data growth on existing LTE networks but also to enable higher use 5G customers. LightShed has identified the potential for C-Band and mmWave spectrum to be paired with Ligado's L-Band spectrum for uplinks using dynamic spectrum sharing (DSS), thereby enhancing the value and opportunities for LTE and 5G in those higher bands. According to LightShed, "Ligado could supply an operator like Verizon with at least two years of wireless data growth on a network," and it could similarly help meet T-Mobile's capacity needs. 

The Commission submitted a draft order regarding Ligado's L-band applications to an interagency advisory review board in October. The review is set to conclude on or about December 6. Given that the review is ongoing and also that the Department of Defense is a member of the interagency board, it's unusual that Defense Secretary Mark Esper went outside the process and released to the press his November 18 letter. The letter claims that Ligado's proposed network would cause interference with services in other bands – claims the Defense Department previously made to the Commission in a June 2019 letter. Ligado has previously disputed those interference claims, and the Commission surely considered them in reaching its own conclusion on the matter. 

In some ways, the Defense Department's last-minute public rehash of old arguments is reminiscent of tactics used by other agencies attempting to derail the FCC's implementation of its 24 GHz spectrum band plan even after the auction was concluded. It's not unusual for government agencies or other institutions to have different viewpoints on technical matters. To avoid permanent interagency gridlock, federal law gives to the Commission the final say on how spectrum for non-government purposes will be used. In the case of the 24 GHz band, the Commission refused to be deterred and has followed through on its spectrum plan.

The Commission should show the same determination in the case of the L-Band. The agency should now proceed with dispatch to act on Ligado's modified applications. 

After NTIA's Report, the FCC Should Act on Ligado's Spectrum Proposal

On August 30, NTIA released its first "Annual Report on the Status of Spectrum Repurposing." The report overviews "existing efforts and planned near- to mid-term spectrum repurposing initiatives." This includes 30 MHz of L-Band spectrum that Ligado Networks has proposed to repurpose for hybrid terrestrial-satellite network operations. In describing "Next Steps" for that valuable but currently unused L-Band spectrum, NTIA's report states: "The FCC will issue a determination on the applicant’s pending modification applications." 

The upshot of NTIA's report for Ligado's L-Band spectrum is the recognition that the ball is now in the FCC's court. Now the Commission ought to take decisive action on Ligado Networks' amended applications to deploy its wireless terrestrial network. On several occasions, Free State Foundation President Randolph May and I have called for an agency decision on Ligado's modified applications. And we have pointed to the potential economic benefits – potentially between $250 and $500 billion – that would result from putting Ligado's L-Band spectrum into use for delivering Internet-of-Things (IoT) services and other advanced uses for business enterprises. 

Indeed, Ligado filed a June 2019 petition seeking prompt action on its proposed terrestrial wireless network pursuant to Section 7 of the Communications Act. As Randolph May and I have stated, "Ligado presents a strong case that its proposed hybrid network fits within the Section 7 definition of new technologies and services." Putting more spectrum into commercial use for advanced services is mission critical for the U.S. economy. With NTIA's acknowledgement that Ligado's modified applications now await an FCC determination, the Commission should act promptly to render a decision.

Ligado Takes Another Positive Step

On May 31, Ligado filed an amendment to its pending Federal Communications Commission license modification application advising the agency of further steps it has taken to protect aviation GPS devices from claimed interference. This is another in a series of steps that Ligado has taken since the company emerged from bankruptcy several years ago as it works, constructively it seems, to resolve potential interference issues that thus far have delayed putting the L-band spectrum to productive use.

We plan to take a closer look in the near future at where matters stand. But, as an immediate reaction to Ligado’s latest filing, there is no gainsaying that the deployment of advanced wireless services like those it proposes should provide substantial public interest benefits. As Valerie Green, Ligado’s Executive Vice President and Chief Legal Officer declared in a May 31 blog announcing the filing of the amendment: “Next-generation wireless networks – connecting an entire new category of IoT-enabled devices, sensors, and machines  – are projected to create three million new jobs and give the economy a $500 billion boost. Our 40 MHz of mid-band spectrum will help get our country there and regain ground in the global race to 5G.”

In today’s fast-paced marketplace environment – and with much at stake for the economy with regard to 5G deployment – it’s important, even imperative, that NTIA, indeed the entire Administration, and the FCC, work to ensure that Ligado’s proposal receives prompt consideration.