Satellite Harmful Interference: A U.S. Telecom Perspective Justin (Gus) Hurwitz University of Nebraska College of Law June 6, 2014

A US Telecom Perspective Satellite issues are relatively “uninteresting” in US E.g., satellite issues are handled by International Bureau Non-specialists at FCC often not familiar w/ satellite issues A key question is what is “harmful” interference I’m going to talk about something different When do changed uses of spectrum interfere with existing uses Four case studies of problems resulting from efforts to repurpose satellite spectrum for non-satellite use LightSquared; Dish/Echostar; Globalstar; Iridium vs. Globalstar June 6, 2014 Harmful Interference – A US Perspective

A US Telecom Perspective Satellite issues are relatively “uninteresting” in US E.g., satellite issues are handled by International Bureau Non-specialists at FCC often not familiar w/ satellite issues A key question is what is “harmful” interference I’m going to talk about something different When do changed uses of spectrum interfere with existing uses Four case studies of problems resulting from efforts to repurpose satellite spectrum for non-satellite use LightSquared; Dish/Echostar; Globalstar; Iridium vs. Globalstar But first … why aren’t satellite issues “interesting”? June 6, 2014 Harmful Interference – A US Perspective

Harmful Interference – A US Perspective Federalism The good The bad The ugly June 6, 2014 Harmful Interference – A US Perspective

Harmful Interference – A US Perspective Federalism The good Rules can be tuned to local conditions Experimentation The bad Externalities & spillovers Coordination problems No economies of scale The ugly Competing jurisdictions (“race to the bottom”) June 6, 2014 Harmful Interference – A US Perspective

Spectrum Liberalization & ATC Spectrum liberalization – transferable & flexible use Trend started in US in 1980s in response to CMRS challenges Is increasingly the default & preferred treatment 2003 ATC Order (cf. Complementary Ground Component) Two key requirements “Substantial Satellite Service” “Integrated Service Offering” (integrated receivers) Purpose: gap-filling Other Background: Nat’l Broadband Plan (2010) 300 MHz spectrum for CMRS by 2015 (incl 90MHz from MSS) 500 MHz spectrum for CMRS by 2020 June 6, 2014 Harmful Interference – A US Perspective

Case Study 1: LightSquared LightSquared wanted to repurpose spectrum adjacent to GPS for nationwide LTE network Spent $4 on two satellites and to buy & repack spectrum 1.6265–1.6605 & 1.525–1.559 GHz Est. consumer value $14–$120 billion Worked with FCC & industry to design network Started in 2001; conditional approval in 2011; denied in 2012 June 6, 2014 Harmful Interference – A US Perspective

Case Study 1: LightSquared LightSquared wanted to repurpose spectrum adjacent to GPS for nationwide LTE network Spent $4 on two satellites and to buy & repack spectrum 1.6265–1.6605 & 1.525–1.559 GHz Est. consumer value $14–$120 billion Worked with FCC & industry to design network Started in 2001; conditional approval in 2011; denied in 2012 June 6, 2014 Harmful Interference – A US Perspective

Case Study 1: LightSquared LightSquared wanted to repurpose spectrum adjacent to GPS for nationwide LTE network Spent $4 on two satellites and to buy & repack spectrum 1.6265–1.6605 & 1.525–1.559 GHz Est. consumer value $14–$120 billion Worked with FCC & industry to design network Started in 2001; conditional approval in 2011; denied in 2012 Huh??? GPS uses adjacent spectrum (1.559–1.610 GHz) $millions of GPS receivers designed w/ insufficient filters June 6, 2014 Harmful Interference – A US Perspective

Case Study 1: LightSquared LightSquared wanted to repurpose spectrum adjacent to GPS for nationwide LTE network Spent $4 on two satellites and to buy & repack spectrum 1.6265–1.6605 & 1.525–1.559 GHz Est. consumer value $14–$120 billion Worked with FCC & industry to design network Started in 2001; conditional approval in 2011; denied in 2012 Huh??? GPS uses adjacent spectrum (1.559–1.610 GHz) $millions of GPS receivers designed w/ insufficient filters June 6, 2014 Harmful Interference – A US Perspective

Case Study 2: DISH (a success story!) June 6, 2014 Harmful Interference – A US Perspective

Case Study 2: DISH (a success story!) June 6, 2014 Harmful Interference – A US Perspective

Case Study 2: DISH (a success story!) DISH sought to repurpose MSS spectrum for LTE 2012: acquired other two 2 GHz MSS providers 2.000–2.020/2.180–2.200 GHz Became only holder of “2 GHz” MSS spectrum FCC reclassified 2 GHz band from Part 25 (MSS, w/ ATC possible) to Part 27 (AWS, flexible terrestrial) 2 GHz band had seen little MSS and no ATC June 6, 2014 Harmful Interference – A US Perspective

Case Study 3: Globalstar Repurposing satellite spectrum for terrestrial use June 6, 2014 Harmful Interference – A US Perspective

Case Study 3: Globalstar Repurposing satellite spectrum for terrestrial use 2.4835–2.495 GHz (exclusive sat. downlink license) Globalstar seeks to offer terrestrial Wifi service on ch. 14 2.473-2.4835 (unlicensed) + 2.4535–2.495 (exclusive) = 2.473–2.495 GHz = IEEE 802.11 Ch.14 Key point: Wifi is a low power service Seeking waiver of ATC rules Need to demonstrate primary satellite service (minor) That devices must support both MSS & terrestrial (major) FCC NPRM is currently pending June 6, 2014 Harmful Interference – A US Perspective

Case Study 3: Globalstar Repurposing satellite spectrum for terrestrial use 2.4835–2.495 GHz (exclusive sat. downlink license) Globalstar seeks to offer terrestrial Wifi service on ch. 14 2.473-2.4835 (unlicensed) + 2.4535–2.495 (exclusive) = 2.473–2.495 GHz = IEEE 802.11 Ch.14 Key point: Wifi is a low power service Seeking waiver of ATC rules Need to demonstrate primary satellite service (minor) That devices must support both MSS & terrestrial (major) FCC NPRM is currently pending June 6, 2014 Harmful Interference – A US Perspective

Case Study 4: Iridium vs. Globalstar Globalstar also wants to use its 1.6 GHz spectrum to deploy terrestrial LTE (high power!) service June 6, 2014 Harmful Interference – A US Perspective

Case Study 4: Iridium vs. Globalstar Globalstar also wants to use its 1.6 GHz spectrum to deploy terrestrial LTE (high power!) service Iridium is petitioning FCC to prohibit this 1.610000–1.617775 GHz (excl. Globalstar MSS spectrum) 1.617775–1.618725 GHz (shared b/w Iridium & Globalstar) 1.618725–1.626500 GHz (excl. Iridium MSS spectrum) Iridium is a pure-MSS play, wants shared spectrum reclassified for MSS-only use, promises immediate use of spectrum FCC is slated to address this after 2.4GHz petition Would Globalstar’s LTE ATC interfere with Iridium’s MSS Globalstar’s higher-value use vs. Iridium’s immed. deployment June 6, 2014 Harmful Interference – A US Perspective

Harmful Interference – A US Perspective Conclusions & Issues High vs. Low value uses Regulatory vs. Market control ATC Rules & how (whether?) to allow flexible uses Part 25 vs. Part 27 classification High vs. Low power uses Receiver design Defining & Measuring Interference (not satellite specific) Interference temperature Harm-claim thresholds June 6, 2014 Harmful Interference – A US Perspective