WRC Will Likely See IMT Receiving Some C-Band Currently Used by FSS, SatCon Told
Some C-band spectrum almost surely will end up allocated to mobile broadband usage, though the satellite industry remains concerned about protecting the rest, industry experts said in New York Wednesday at SatCon. The satellite industry has indicated C-band reallocation issues will be a major fight at the ongoing World Radiocommunications Conference in Geneva (see 1501150050).
WRC-15's agenda item 1.1 on consideration of C-band spectrum used by fixed satellite service (FSS) for international mobile telecom (IMT) and other mobile broadband applications "has kept us awake at night," said Gerald Oberst, SES senior vice president-global regulatory and governmental strategy. He and Winston Caldwell, Fox Networks Group vice president-spectrum engineering, said the 3400-3600 MHz sub-band, which is lightly used by FSS operations, will likely end up going to IMT services in the U.S. and Europe. The FSS industry is focused now on protection measures for existing FSS orations, Oberst said.
The upper part of C-band -- 3800-4200 MHz -- by contrast looks relatively safe for satellite status quo, he said, because only a few nations such as Japan and Sweden are pushing for IMT allocation there, Oberst said. "It's the middle band where all the barbed wire and gas and charges are," he said. "The industry has really come out in force to defend this." Mobile use of 3400-3600 MHz carries with it some interference challenges because FSS receivers need a protection distance of as much as nine kilometers from IMT use, Caldwell said.
Satellite use of C-band also is feeling pressure by the FCC 3.5 GHz proceeding in docket 12-354, and draft spectrum legislation from Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John Thune, R-S.D., for reviewing uses of the upper part of that spectrum, at 3700-4200 MHz, for mobile services, Oberst said. That proposal's expected to see broad support from lawmakers (see 1511090051). While the satellite industry doesn't use much of that end of C-band, the proceeding raises broader worries about FSS protections overall, Oberst said. "This doesn't have to be a zero-sum game," he said. "You don't have to take spectrum" from FSS, he said, pointing to relatively unused sections of lower C-band. "I want to talk about how we work together."
Though the wireless industry is pushing for spectrum, it's tough to ascertain what wireless spectrum needs actually are because past projections of growth have fallen short of reality, said Armand Musey, founder of satellite consulting firm Summit Ridge Group. The tens of billions of dollars in annual carrier capital expenditures, and spectrum prices, seem to contradict indications of less-than-expected spectrum demand, Musey said. Those projections may have been off, but it's indisputable demand for mobile broadband is growing quickly and needs more spectrum, said wireless and wireline consultant Coleman Bazelon, principal at consulting firm Brattle Group.
Panelists often focused on the importance of FSS's C-band usage. Since FSS often provides mobile backhaul services, Oberst said, "Even the mobile community should be supporting us on this." Broadcaster Fox makes "very extensive use of C-band" distributing content, Caldwell said. Wireless' demand for C-band spectrum is "for undefined services," said Alexander Gerdenitsch, EchoStar senior principal engineer-regulatory affairs.
On the possibility of transitioning FSS from C-band, Oberst said just transitioning from one satellite to another in the same frequency carries huge transactional costs, so relocating from C-band would likely be that much more difficult and costly. But that may be a cost the wireless industry is willing to bear. "Tell us what [those expenses] are, and we'll figure out if they're worth it," Bazelon said.