Spectrum Strategic Planning DoD Spectrum Workshop 2011 “Spectrum Support to Our Military Forces – The Challenge Ahead”

2 Disclaimer The views expressed in this briefing are personal views and do not represent official Air Force position I fully support the President’s direction for the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) to work with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and federal agencies … To identify 500 MHz of federal and non-federal spectrum for wireless broadband within 10 years, While protecting critical current and future capabilities I do not claim to have all the answers and aim to elicit thought and open discussion

3 Fundamental Spectrum Principles Finite natural resource; cannot be Banked Expanded Concentrated National asset Enables diverse government, commercial, consumer services and capabilities Optimize use to deliver the maximum national benefit UHF 300 – 3000 MHz HF & Below MHz VHF 30 – 300 MHz UHF 300 – 3000 MHz SHF 3 – 30 GHz EHF 300 – 300 GHz UHF 300 – 3000 MHz SHF 3 – 30 GHz VHF 30 – 300 MHz UHF/SHF Addition VHF/UHF Addition 600 MHz- Years US Strategic Spectrum Reserve

4 Current Process – Shortfalls No short or long range forecasting/guidance Risk – expensive modifications over life of system New systems in development for candidate bands No method to balance diverse requirements Consumer services, defense, medical, etc. Maximum benefit to nation not assured Limited incentive(s) to improve use New/best technologies not always implemented quickly Lacks holistic approach required to produce benefits Limited comparable spectrum availability Linchpin issue already; only gets tougher from here Could degrade into spectrum “musical chairs”

5 Inputs to Strategic Spectrum Planning Requirements – both current and predicted future Current allocations/use (US & international) Current regulatory environment Current state of technology Current and projected gaps (unmet requirements)

6 Points to Ponder duplicationBalancing competition against duplication How many ways to receive same television program? Definition of requirements requiredDoes possible equate to required? Definition/measure of utility common scaleWhat is a common scale to measure diverse functions? Increasing utility from a finite resource truly enablesWhat truly enables increased utility? international harmonizationImportance of international harmonization What are the risks and rewards of going it alone? unknownsThe future is full of unknowns How to plan for unknown developments?

7 Strategic Spectrum Plan Key Components Technology Plan Identifies, prioritizes, and organizes research and development of promising spectrum technologies Deployment of new technologies can increase utility Regulatory Policy Plan Identifies, prioritizes and organizes development/revision of regulatory policy to enhance spectrum utility (including deployment of new technologies) Allocation/Use Plans Next SlideShort–, Mid– and Long–Term (Next Slide) Supported by Regulatory Policy & Technology Plans Provides clear guidance to system owners / developers; both near–term and long–term

8 Strategic Spectrum Plan Key Components Allocation/Use Plans Near–Term (1 – 5 Years) Very specific bands, dates, exclusions, conditions/rules Relocations in progress Auctions conducted Supported by Regulatory Policy Plan Mid–Term (6 – 15 Years) Studies conducted, technologies refined/tested/finalized New uses identified, bands refined/finalized Relocation/termination/sharing plans developed Supported Technology Plan; Drives Regulatory Plan Long–Term (16 – 30+ Years) Broad concepts, general bands Reduced fixed service below 6 GHz by 50% in 20 yrs, 90% 30 yrs Drives Technology Plan

9 Plan Component Relationships Long Term Allocation Plan Technology Plan Regulatory Plan Mid Term Allocation Plan Near Term Allocation Plan Unmet Requirements Time Progression

10 US National Spectrum Plan US Non- Federal Spectrum Plan US Federal Spectrum Plan US Federal Spectrum Plan US Federal Spectrum Plan US Federal Spectrum Plan US Federal Spectrum Plan US Federal Spectrum Plan US Air Force Spectrum Plan US on-Federal Spectrum Plan US on-Federal Spectrum Plan US on-Federal Spectrum Plan US on-Federal Spectrum Plan US Non-Federal Spectrum Plan US Broadcast Spectrum Plan One Spectrum Plans Must Integrate Vertically & Horizontally Holistic Approach

11 Relationship to International Agenda US National Spectrum Plan Position on WRC Agenda Items Proposals for Future WRC Agenda Items WRC Decisions

12 Challenges – It Isn’t Easy Resources – to do it right People (talented), money, time Balancing competing interests Finding Apples-to-Oranges comparison Requires Long-Term View Does not mesh well with short term horizons Factors we influence, but do not control International (WRC, ICAO, etc.), Legislative Unknowns – Particularly Long Term Technological/societal developments Natural or manmade events Transitioning to a long term process

13 Summary & Recommendations Maximizing national benefit requires long term approach to spectrum management Present system lacks long term view essential to maximizing benefits Optimum approach is not easy; Present approach is neither easy nor optimum Optimum approach is not easy; Present approach is neither easy nor optimum

14

15 Sample AF Spectrum Use HF & Below 0 – 30 MHz VHF 30 – 300 MHz UHF 300 – 3000 MHz SHF 3 – 30 GHz EHF 30 – 300 GHz