C-Band Alliance, Cable Trade Jabs

SHARE THIS ARTICLE

“You cannot cover all of America with millimeter wave spectrum. C-band is critical for bringing 5G” to the entire country, said Preston Padden on Tuesday. Padden is the head of advocacy and public relations for the C-Band Alliance, comprised of Intelsat, SES, Eutelsat and Telesat.

During a panel discussion at the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation think tank concerning the FCC’s proposal to reallocate a portion of the band for wireless use, Padden outlined the alliance proposal. By speaking with satellite operators, cable companies, broadcasters and wireless carriers, the alliance has determined it can “free up 200 MHz” of C-band spectrum “voluntarily,” said Padden. This would happen within 18 to 36 months of the Commission issuing a final order, while maintaining service continuity for current satellite customers.

The voluntary aspect is key, he said, because the incumbent satellite companies “are under no legal obligation to clear even 1 MHz of spectrum. Any effort to seize spectrum involuntarily would produce more than a decade of litigation.”  

The alliance is proposing to engage in secondary market transactions directly with the wireless industry, believing this is the fastest way to free-up a portion of the band for 5G. It’s now preparing “hundreds” of letters to prospective bidders and pledges to make special accommodations for smaller rural telcos and carriers. The alliance plans to work cooperatively with the FCC and industries involved on technical considerations like power levels, out-of-band emissions and license size. But Padden made clear the FCC would set the rules and make key decisions for whatever is to happen.

Many support the plan, including broadcasters and other content distributors who have registered 16,500 receive earth stations with the FCC, according to Padden. He said he wouldn’t be surprised if the same number of unregistered earth stations are currently using the band as well. Reply comments on the issue are due to the FCC (docket 18-122) on Tuesday, November 27.

T-Mobile suggested the agency postpone any C-band action until its proposed merger with Sprint is resolved. “But we can’t hold off,” Padden said. Also, cable companies not eager for competition from 5G wireless are ready to pour “regulatory sand into the gears of the CBA process,” he claimed. Colleen King, Vice President of Regulatory Affairs, Charter Communications, bristled at that, saying, cable companies don’t want to slow down the proceeding. “We need more facts. We’re not pouring sand, but want to make sure this is done correctly.”    

“As an incumbent, we provide critical services in this band,” said King. The alliance believes 200 MHz can be cleared and others say only 100 MHz is needed, King emphasized. “We need to understand what the right amount is. If spectrum goes to only two carriers we don’t think that’s a fair outcome,” she said.

Padden said the alliance came up with the 200 MHz number to leave sufficient spectrum for current and future customer needs. C-band provided 99.9 percent reliability, he said, adding customers don’t want to move to the Ku band which is subject to rain fade or fiber. Intel consultant Peter Pitsch said this situation is different than the 600 MHz auction, where, “the FCC could repack and there were alternatives.” He called it “challenging for the FCC to come up with a solution that is sufficiently voluntary and won’t take a lot of time.” Comments? Email us

By Leslie Stimson, Inside Towers Washington Bureau Chief

November 14, 2018