14 septembre 2020 | International, Aérospatial, C4ISR

Ligado Exemplifies Broken US Spectrum Management: Industry Experts

"There's a lot of inefficiencies in the process. But it's basically a fight, with each community pressing its case to its own regulatory body," says Jennifer Warren, Lockheed Martin's vice president for technology, policy and regulation.

By on September 11, 2020 at 2:19 PM

WASHINGTON: The FCC's controversial decision to let Ligado proceed with its 5G wireless network over fierce DoD objections is just one more example of the broken state of the US regime for managing spectrum, industry experts say.

“There's a lot of inefficiencies in the process. But it's basically a fight, with each community pressing its case to its own regulatory body,” Jennifer Warren, Lockheed Martin's vice president for technology, policy and regulation, told the Secure World Foundation (SWF) Summit for Space Sustainability this morning.

This has led a little-known but highly influential government advisory panel to recommend a series of options for overhauling the US regulatory system — including the creation of a new agency — to empower a single entity to decide how to balance skyrocketing demands for bandwidth as availability dwindles.

“[T]he United States' current approach for managing the use of spectrum is no longer effectively serving the needs of the entire stakeholder community and would benefit from reform,” the Commerce Spectrum Management Advisory Committee (CSMAC) says in a recent report. “Moreover, with the increased use of spectrum by all stakeholders, we agree that issues around allocations, spectrum-sharing and band adjacencies will need to be handled with both speed and skill to ensure that the US is making the most of its critical national resources.”

CSMAC, created by the Commerce Department in 2004, comprises spectrum policy experts outside the government.

The report, said Warren, who was one of the authors, was designed to kick start what many in industry see as an urgent debate about how US spectrum policies can accommodate a rapidly changing technological environment — particularly the emergence of 5G networking, which has the potential to revolutionize global communications.

Currently, two different US government bodies have regulatory control of spectrum by different users with very different priorities. The FCC governs use of spectrum by the commercial telecommunications industry (both terrestrial and space-based). The Commerce Department's National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) governs access to bandwidth for government agencies, including DoD. This bifurcation was established by the 1934 Communications Act and remains in place despite massive upheaval in technology and spectrum use since then.

The Ligado case underscores that, despite a 2003 memorandum of understanding between FCC and NTIA that pledges them to coordinate, there is no requirement that they reach consensus, Warren explained. Indeed, there isn't even a requirement that a disputed decision by the FCC, such as on Ligado, must be escalated for adjudication. Instead, the FCC has “unilateral decision-making power.”

Indeed, the CMSAC report stresses that: “There are no statutory federal or non-federal bands. All such federal, non-federal, and shared band allocations result from agreements between NTIA and the FCC.”

As Breaking D has reported extensively, DoD, the Intelligence Community, the Transportation Department, the FAA and even the Agriculture Department — not to mention congressional defense committee leaders — have charged that the Ligado plan will create serious interference to GPS receivers used both by commercial/civil users and US troops. Those concerns have been echoed by a number of commercial users groups, from airline pilots to construction workers to farmers.

Not only does the current regulatory system block rational decisions on spectrum sharing among types of users, it also creates problems for the United States in its negotiations with other countries on spectrum usage at the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), Kimberly Baum, vice president of regulatory affairs at Echostar Corp., told SWF.

The ITU is responsible for setting rules about how spectrum is used by whom at the international level via its Radio Regulations and frequency allocation tables — something that particularly affects satellites that usually serve more than one nation. Every three to four years, ITU holds a World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC), the next of which is scheduled for 2023, where the 193 member nations propose changes to spectrum usage. The State Department is charged with bringing the US position on changes, developed by the FCC and NTIA, to Geneva.

Baum, who also is co-chair of the Satellite Industry Association's (SIA) regulatory working group, explained that because the NTIA and FCC each works with its own constituents, sometimes for years, to craft those WRC proposals, differences between them are not resolved until the last minute — if at all. And this loses the time the US needs to try to convince other countries to back its views.

(Indeed, as Breaking D readers know, a number of US lawmakers and policy experts are worried that internal US disarray on spectrum management rules for 5G is effectively ceding power at the ITU to China.)

“I would love to see a concerted effort to make decisions that meaningfully accommodate multiple services and technologies in a more fair, thoughtful way,” Baum said.

Any changes to the current regulatory system would require congressional action to rewrite the Communications Act, and re-allocate statutory authorities, said Warren. A next step, she said, might be for the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to do a study of the issues and make recommendations to Congress.

https://breakingdefense.com/2020/09/ligado-exemplifies-broken-us-spectrum-management-industry-experts

Sur le même sujet

  • G7 foreign ministers condemn Iran's export of ballistic missiles to Russia
  • Pentagon Extends JEDI Deadline Again—With a Catch

    26 septembre 2018 | International, C4ISR

    Pentagon Extends JEDI Deadline Again—With a Catch

    By Heather Kuldell, Managing Editor The department is requiring bidders to deliver their proposals in person. Companies bidding on the Defense Department's multibillion-dollar Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure cloud contract will need to hand-deliver their proposals. “In lieu of electronic submission, an offeror's entire proposal shall be captured on one or more DVDs and submitted in person only. No other forms of submission will be accepted,” the department said in an amendment to the JEDI request for proposal posted Monday. The department also pushed the deadline back a few days. Bidders must contact JEDI procurement officials by 5 p.m. Eastern time Oct. 10 to get logistical details for turning in their proposals in person on Oct. 12. It's the second time the department extended JEDI's original Sept. 17 deadline, following other amendments that answered industry questions and a pre-award bid protest from Oracle. Defense officials describe the JEDI acquisition as the foundation for hosting mission-critical data for warfighters around the world. But since it was announced a year ago, the procurement has drawn scrutiny from industry and lawmakers for requiring a single cloud service provider instead of multiple vendors. The contract could be worth up to $10 billion over 10 years if all the follow-on options are exercised. But before the project sees a cent, Congress wants more insight into JEDI and the rest of the department's cloud computing projects. In the final conference report for the Defense-related minibus, appropriators order the defense secretary to deliver a cloud-centric budget accounting plan and a detailed, enterprisewide cloud computing strategy that includes “defining opportunities for multiple cloud service providers.” The department would be prohibited from spending anything on JEDI or the Defense Enterprise Office Solutions—another multibillion-dollar cloud contract—until 90 days after those plans are delivered to defense committees. “The conferees believe cloud computing, if implemented properly, will have far-reaching benefits for improving the efficiency of day-to-day operations of the Department of Defense, as well as enabling new military capabilities critical to maintaining a tactical advantage over adversaries,” lawmakers wrote in the joint explanatory statement. The Senate passed the minibus—which also includes labor, health, education and a continuing resolution—last week. The House is scheduled to vote on the package this week. https://www.nextgov.com/it-modernization/2018/09/pentagon-extends-jedi-deadline-again-catch/151541/

  • Developing the Royal Navy’s autonomous underwater capability: commercial clarification

    7 juin 2019 | International, Naval

    Developing the Royal Navy’s autonomous underwater capability: commercial clarification

    Please be advised that, in respect to the Defence and Security Accelerator competition: developing the Royal Navy's autonomous underwater capability, Dstl Commercial Services have offered a commercial clarification in respect to industry queries around the agreement of a Limitation of a Contractor's Liability to the proposed Framework Agreement: It is not possible to request a Limit of a Contractor's Liability (LoCL) under a Framework Agreement because it is impossible to calculate an appropriate LoCL amount with such a broad scope of work. Requests for a LoCL to the overarching framework agreement will be turned down, and proposals that include such requests will be deemed to be commercially non-compliant and excluded from the competition. However, in the event of placement of any Framework Agreement as a result of this Themed Competition, under the Tasking element of the aforementioned Framework Agreement (Item 2 of the proposed Framework Agreement only) on a Task by Task basis we will consider the risks associated with that Task and may consider it appropriate to agree a LoCL against that specific task only. This does not apply to Item 1 of the proposed Framework Agreement. Requests for a LoCL against Item 1 of the Framework Agreement will not be considered and proposals that include them excluded from the competition. Please be advised that this clarification explicitly applies to the Defence and Security Accelerator competition: developing the Royal Navy's autonomous underwater capability only. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/developing-the-royal-navys-autonomous-underwater-capability-commercial-clarification

Toutes les nouvelles