Wireless carrier T-Mobile has told the FCC that it has the power to require incumbent C-band satellite operators to relocate on an accelerated basis after an FCC auction, that it should exercise that authority, and if the incumbents don't do so voluntarily, the FCC should force them to. 

Related: Pai Says C-Band Item Will Be on February Meeting Agenda 

That is according to a just-released document detailing the request. 

"T-Mobile joins others in urging the Commission to employ its authority under the Communications Act of 1934 (“Act”) to require, as a condition of receiving a license, that winning bidders pay incumbent license holders to voluntarily relocate their current C-band operations on an accelerated basis," the company told the commission. 

The FCC plans to vote at its February meeting on a plan to auction 280 MHz of C-band spectrum for 5G, an auction it expects to hold, or at least start, by the end of the year. 

T-Mobile appears to support the spirit of a C-Band Alliance (CBA) request that the FCC make compensating satellite operators a condition of bidding on the spectrum. CBA comprises the major satellite companies who are giving up that licensed spectrum. 

But unlike CBA, which said the incentive payment should be determined by the ultimate value of the auctioned spectrum, T-Mobile wants both the moving expense and incentive payment determined prior to auction, though it suggested that could include satellite estimates of what the spectrum would bring at auction, as well as "the risks associated with an expedited transition," and other factors.  

That incentive payment would include both covering moving expenses and an incentive payment for moving quickly. FCC chairman Ajit Pai would not comment Thursday (Jan. 30) on whether the FCC item would include an incentive payment, as some reports have indicated. 

A new Senate bill mandating a C-band auction has such a payment, but capped at $1 billion, which CBA has indicated is clearly insufficient given the investment they have made and the likely value of the 280 MHz, which it said could be as much as $77 billion. 

T-Mobile put a sting in the tail of its proposal to incentivize, and thus accelerate, voluntary early exits. "[O]nce relocation is complete—or at the end of the specified transition period, whether or not all incumbents have voluntarily relocated as required to collect acceleration payments—the Commission would modify the incumbent operators’ licenses to clear the spectrum for use by the auction winners."

Another week, another spectrum pitch related to winning the race to 5G.

The latest comes from satellite companies fighting to the last ditch to get paid for more than the moving expenses of clearing off part of the C-band.

Networks use the C-band to deliver programming feeds via satellite to cable systems and TV and radio stations.

The C-Band Alliance, representing foreign companies providing those satellite programming services, first wanted the spectrum to be repurposed in marketplace negotiations with wireless companies. When that looked like it might not happen, they offered to provide spectrum for an interoperable 5G network as part of that plan. When that didn’t fly and FCC chairman Ajit Pai signaled there would be an auction, they suggested that would be an illegal taking of their spectrum and threatened to sue.

Now, with the auction appearing to be all but a done deal, the alliance is saying the FCC should make paying them for the spectrum above and beyond moving expenses a quid pro quo for participating in any auction.

The Alliance said the FCC should require bidders to pay for “accelerated clearing” if they want to bid on the spectrum. It argued that satellite operators are “uniquely positioned” — for a price — to provide the speed of repurposing for 5G to help the U.S. win the race to next-gen wireless broadband, a priority for the Trump administration.

The mandatory fee approach would also remove the specter of protracted litigation holding up the repurposing, they suggested, and added: “Failure to involve the CBA in the transition of the C-band would be legally perilous. Unilateral authorization of new terrestrial mobile operations in any significant portion of the C-band would constitute an unlawful basic and fundamental change to the authorizations held by the members of the CBA.”

Some scholars and and economists associated with limited-government/tech freedom groups are pushing the FCC to limit its participation in the effort to re-purpose some C-band (3.7-4.2 GHZ midband) spectrum for 5G, at least when it comes to a government auction that could take years.

That came in a letter to the commission from folks with the American Consumer Institute, American Enterprise Institute (AEI does not take policy positions, so the trio of AEI folks signing on to the letter were speaking for themselves), the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the Lincoln Network, R Street Institute, and Tech Freedom.

The FCC has been freeing up high-band spectrum through two recent auctions, but the midband spectrum is the sweet spot for 5G given its propagation characteristics, so it is under pressure, including internally from some of its own commissioners, to free up more of that.
Related: Taxpayer Groups Allied Against C-Band Alliance Plan

The FCC is currently deciding how to best reallocate at least 200 MHz of the 500 MHz C-band spectrum currently used for satellite delivery of programming from distributors to cable operators and broadcast stations, as well as from the field back to the studio. On the table are another FCC spectrum auction and a secondary market approach overseen by the FCC.

The C-Band Alliance, comprising the international satellite companies that make that delivery happen, have proposed to make the spectrum available through a secondary market auction, rather than an FCC auction, arguing that is the fastest and best way to get the spectrum into the hands of wireless carriers and promising spectrum can be freed and incumbent satellite users protected.

The letter's signatories agree. "Under regular circumstances, it can take a decade or more to bring spectrum to market. Waiting that long, the US will likely miss the 5G opportunity. Instead, the FCC should support the CBA proposal as it is a more efficient – and timely – approach to put the spectrum to work for 5G," they told the FCC commissioners in a letter.

The alliance says its approach could get spectrum into the 5G pipeline within 18 months of the FCC's final approval.

The FCC has made freeing up as much spectrum as possible for 5G a priority, as it appears to be for President Trump as well, who is looking to beat China in the race for next-gen wireless broadband. It is an issue on which he is in rare agreement with congressional Democrats.

Cable operators and broadcasters appear OK with freeing up some of the spectrum so long as they are sufficiently protected from interference and compensated for the repack, at the least have their costs covered and perhaps even getting a cut of the take from those private market deals. 

WASHINGTON — FCC chairman Ajit Pai has said his agency is still vetting various proposals for freeing up C-band spectrum, amid signals that it could be leaning toward a marketplace sale rather than an commission-conducted auction.

That would be good news for the C-Band Alliance, a group of international satellite carriers with those spectrum licenses looking to cash in on sales through deals with carriers. It could also be a payday for cable operators and broadcasters.

Democrats on Capitol Hill have been pushing back publicly on marketplace deals, so the issue was very much in the spotlight and remains complicated.

The Federal Communications Commission voted unanimously in July 2018 to find ways to open up the C-band spectrum (3.7 to 4.2 Gigahertz) — either all of the proposed 500 Megahertz or some portion of it — for terrestrial wireless use. Those ways could include an incentive or capacity auction, a market mechanism in which incumbents voluntarily strike deals to reduce their footprint, or some other means.

“The FCC is still considering the merits of various proposals and making sure that whatever it does is legally supportable,” one cable lobbyist following the proceedings said.

Repack Proceeds Possible

One of those proposals includes cutting cable and broadcast in on the proceeds from a C-band repack. That’s something ACA Connects, the trade group for smaller, independent MSOs, has said should happen as long as whatever the FCC decides protects incumbents from interference from wireless carriers getting the spectrum.

The FCC has asked stakeholders to comment on what authority they think the regulator has to compensate satellite operators that use the spectrum to deliver network programming to cable operators and TV stations, as well as its authority to compensate incumbent MSOs and broadcasters that might have to find other spectrum or use another delivery system, depending on how much spectrum it winds up reclaiming in the band.

Pai told Congress following the request for the targeted input on a “certain course of action” that the last thing the FCC wanted to do was something it thought was “in the best interests of the American people but [would] then be stuck in the courts for a long time.”

That the FCC was delving deeper into the compensation issue was good news for the alliance. So was a letter to the chairman from two top Senate Republicans who together chair the committee and subcommittee with primary jurisdiction over the FCC.

In that letter, Sens. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) and John Thune (R-S.D.) signaled speed is of the essence, given that the C-band (3.7-4.2 GHz) is midband spectrum, ideal for 5G because of its propagation characteristics.

The senators did more than that. They said, in no uncertain terms, that getting that C-band spectrum to market ASAP could be the difference between winning and losing the race to 5G, a race that President Donald Trump has said the United States must win.

“Your action to speed up the availability of midband spectrum for 5G will play a crucial role in determining whether the American people will reap the full benefits of next-generation technology and whether the United States will win the massive economic benefits associated with leading the world in 5G,” Wicker and Thune wrote.

They did not tell the FCC to forgo an auction for marketplace deals, but they did urge the agency “to act quickly.”

Diane VanBeber, a vice president at C-Band Alliance member Intelsat, called the Thune-Wicker input “the right letter at the right time … We’ve got some solid footing here and we’re continuing to build our case.”

Pai has signaled that an FCC auction, though it would put money in the U.S. Treasury rather than in satellite operators’ pockets, might not be the fastest route to freeing up the spectrum.

Could Be Years Away

With another millimeter-wave auction scheduled for the end of the year and a Universal Service Fund auction to conduct, it could be a couple of years before a C-band auction could be completed. At a recent Senate Appropriations Committee budget hearing, and again in a House oversight hearing, Pai was pressed about the potential billions of dollars to the treasury that might be lost to a marketplace approach.

He said the FCC had to balance a number of factors, but it’s focused on the speed of freeing up that spectrum given that 5G leadership is a top U.S. priority, not only for competitiveness but for investment and innovation.

While Rep. Doris Matsui (D-Calif.) has signaled new legislation could help resolve the issue, Pai suggested that waiting for Congress could work against the need for speed.

The Dynamic Spectrum Alliance said Cisco has now joined its ranks, along with Swarm Technologies and UTStarcom.

“The DSA is looking forward to working with Cisco Systems, Swarm Technologies and UTStarcom as we continue to work with governments and regulators around the world to enable more efficient spectrum utilization that will bring better connectivity and promote social and economic inclusion," said DSA chairman Paul Garnett.

Related: C-Band Alliance Gives FCC More Info on Band-Clearing Plan

As the name advertises, the group, whose members already include Amazon, Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Comcast, has been pushing for more "dynamic" access to "unused" spectrum over traditional market mechanisms like band clearing and auctions, but has been pushing back on the C-Band alliance proposal for clearing and private-market deals over auctions, deals that would lock up spectrum for licensed use rather than more flexible, unlicensed, uses.

"The private sale option raises significant concerns about fairness and efficiency, which the DSA does not believe can be cured by Commission oversight of a private sale," the DSA told the commission in comments on the C-Band proposal. "First, the DSA does not believe that a private sale can provide any assurance or confidence to C-band users, or the public that relies upon their services’ future availability, reliability, or costs. Second, a private sale will not protect the interests of all parties who are interested in acquiring C-band spectrum for flexible use, or the interests of the public in ensuring the sale is conducted in a manner that ensures a competitive market going forward. Third, a private sale would guarantee that U.S. taxpayers would not see any money from the auction of this public asset."

Cable operators and broadcasters are among those incumbents who would be hurt by interference in the band because they use that satellite spectrum for delivery of network programming (broadcast) and programming networks (cable) to stations and cable systems.

After congratulating the New America think tank for running "the most unbalanced panel in the history of panels," C-Band Alliance lobbyist Preston Padden accused the American Cable Association of demanding a $200,000 per system payment to "go away" from the current FCC plan allowing private sale agreements for use of the C-band spectrum, especially for 5G wireless ventures.

Ross Lieberman, ACA's senior vice president of government affairs, dismissed Padden's charge.

"It's just a lie," Lieberman said. "You've never suggested any number. You weren't even in the room the last time we met. You said there was no harm. That was the end of the discussion. I have no idea what you're talking about."

The FCC is contemplating allowing wireless carriers to compensate incumbent satellite operators for giving up spectrum, as the C-Band Alliance has proposed, but ACA says cable ops should get a piece of that pie if that is the way the commission goes.

Charter Communications vice president of regulatory affairs Colleen King, another panelist at the Feb. 5 session, offered that, "We think the best way for us to get access to spectrum ... is through an FCC auction." She acknowledged that Charter "will continue to meet with you" because "we like 5G. We'll talk to everybody."

Veteran lobbyist and TV exec Padden is now executive VP, advocacy and government relations for the C-Band Alliance, a new association representing four European-based satellite carriers -- Intelsat, SES, Eutelsat and Telesat -- that control large swaths of the spectrum used to transmit network programming to cable headends and TV stations. Padden was the first to grab a microphone during the Q&A session after the panel presentation; he directed his comments to Lieberman.

"We have told you a hundred times that we'll cover all of your members' costs. We put it in writing," Padden said. "You came to see us and said you'd go away for $200,000 per cable system. "There's a word for that. It's 'shakedown,'" Padden said with a flourish.

His accusation triggered Lieberman's adamant reply.

In response to another question about a possible FCC auction, Lieberman added, "Parties involved in the process have made it incredibly difficult for the FCC to find a path forward. There has not been a coalescing of support for the private sale."

Incendiary Title But No Easy Solution

The New America program, provocatively titled "The Great Airwaves Robbery II," featured four speakers: Lieberman and King plus spokespersons for Google and Citizens Against Government Waste. All of them questioned the current FCC plan to reallocate the C-band spectrum in ways that could -- as New America's organizer put it -- send "$15 billion-40 billion" to the four companies that now control that spectrum.

Michael Calabrese, director of New America's Wireless Future Project and moderator of the panel session in Washington, explained that he put together the session because of growing attention to the underutilized C-Band (3700-4200 MHz), which is widely sought as a resource for emerging 5G wireless services. The FCC proposed last July to reallocate at least the bottom 200 MHz of C-Band for exclusive licensing to mobile carriers and others triggered a wave of criticism about who will benefit financially from the sale.

"The comment cycle is completed," Calabrese told Multichannel News. "Presumably an initial staff recommendation and Chairman’s input could occur soon [although] we don’t really expect an Order before May or June at the earliest."

"But now that they have a record, the Chairman will likely chart a course forward for the staff," he continued. "All the groups on stage (and others) are also encouraging Congress to get interested. ... That has been the case in parallel situations in the past when this much revenue is at stake."

During the panel discussion, Thomas Schatz, president of Citizens Against Government Waste, insisted that the carriage license "is not a property right" and that funds from any sale "belong to taxpayers, not broadcasters." He urged that, "Congress must decide where proceeds should go."

In his opening remarks, Lieberman opined that the situation requires FCC action soon to achieve "full optimization of capacity." He warned that the C-Band Alliance members "will act as if they are monopolists" if they control and benefit solely from the spectrum sale.

"Their only restraint is that they [could] drive prices so high that programmers go to terrestrial," that is to non-satellite distribution, Lieberman said. He noted, however, that high-capacity internet distribution is not currently an option to many rural and small-town cable headends, ACA's member base.

Charter's King concurred that the FCC should make a decision about spectrum sale. "Not the private satellite companies," she said. "The FCC should focus on the easiest, quickest way" to resolve the reallocation.

But Lieberman's last word was that, "It will take a lot longer than anyone expects."

The C-Band Alliance, comprising fixed satellite service operators, says its market-based proposal to negotiate secondary-market agreements for up to 200 MHz of C-band spectrum, is the win-win solution the FCC is looking for.

That came in its comments this week on the FCC's proposal for sharing the spectrum.

The FCC in July voted unanimously to find ways to open up the C-band spectrum (3.7-4.2 Ghz) for terrestrial wireless use, either all of the 500 MHz or some portion of it, and through either an incentive or capacity auction, a market mechanism where incumbents voluntarily strike deals to reduce their footprint, or some other means. 

The C-band is currently used for satellite delivery of cable and broadcast network programming to TV and radio stations, satellite radio services, and cable head-ends. The FCC wants to open it up to wireless broadband to help close the digital divide and promote 5G, both prime directives for the commission.

The new alliance, which comprises Intelsat, SES, Eutelsat and Telesat--says it will strike secondary market deals for the spectrum within three years of an FCC decision.

It argues that secondary-market transactions are the only way to re-purpose the spectrum. "An FCC auction of mid-band spectrum could not take place until 2021-2022 or later. Litigation with current satellite operators could push that date much further into the future. By that time, the United States would be a small object in China’s 5G rear view mirror."

It also says they are in the best position to protect incumbents.

In its comments this week, the alliance said its approach is the fastest way to re-purpose spectrum, protects existing services, and is consistent with FCC statutory authority.

The alliance is on the same page as broadcast and cable clients when it comes to a proposal by another group--the Broadband Access Coalition--to allow point-to-multipoint (P2MP) operations in the C-band.

The alliance says claims the C-band is underutilized is bogus, and that to allow P2MP services would remove the necessary full-arc, full-spectrum protections that any sharing of the band must be predicated on.

Without that those protections, the satellite operators say they could not provide the uninterrupted distribution services broadcast and cable nets rely on to distribute their programming to stations and systems, a point broadcasters and cable operators have also made. The alliance also said trying to put 2MP ion the C-band was not necessary since there is "ample" alternative spectrum.

The satellite operators providing the majority of C-band satellite services to U.S. customers have banded together to create the C-Band Alliance, which will advocate for their proposal to clear portions of the band for 5G wireless while pledging to protect the broadcasters, cable operators and others who currently use the band.

The C-band is currently used for satellite delivery of cable and broadcast network programming to TV and radio stations and cable head-ends. The FCC wants to open it up to wireless broadband to help close the digital divide and promote 5G, both prime directives for the commission.

Related: NAB Says C-Band Sharing Isn't a Given

The FCC voted unanimously in July to find ways to open up the C-band spectrum (3.7-4.2 GHz) for terrestrial wireless use, either all of the 500 MHz or some portion of it, and through either an incentive or capacity auction, a market mechanism where incumbents voluntarily strike deals to reduce their footprint--the alliance's proposal--or some other means. 

Related: FCC Opens Door to C-Band Sharing, Auction

The alliance, which comprises Intelsat, SES, Eutelsat and Telesat--says it will strike secondary market deals for the spectrum within three years of an FCC decision.

It argues that secondary market transactions are the only way to repurpose the spectrum. "An FCC auction of mid-band spectrum could not take place until 2021-2022 or later. Litigation with current satellite operators could push that date much further into the future. By that time, the United States would be a small object in China’s 5G rear view mirror."

It also says they are in the best position to protect incumbents.

"Only the proposal of the C-band carriers begins with the question 'How much spectrum do we need to retain to serve our customers and their consumers?,' it says. "Every other proposal puts at risk C-band service to existing cable, broadcast and programmer customers and their more than 100 Million U.S. television households and radio listeners."

Related: Broadcast, Cable Tell FCC C-Band Needs More Study

Broadcast and cable trade associations have cautioned the FCC to slow down a bit and consider the impact of sharing the band on what is essentially the distribution backbone for their respective video services. Both want the FCC to consider whether the band can be shared at all given the potential for interference, particularly if the FCC wants dynamic sharing. 

The National Association of Broadcasters declined comment.

Bill Tolpegin, who is CEO of independent TV operator OTA Broadcasting, will be CEO of the C-Band Alliance and former Fox and Disney top exec Preston Padden will advocate for the consortium in Washington. Padden was also head of an alliance of independent stations that sought to give up spectrum in the broadcast incentive auction.

“The 3.7 to 4.2 GHz band, or C-band downlink, is a key component to having a solid U.S. mid-band spectrum play for 5G services," said FCC Commissioner Michael O'Rielly. "This announcement appears to be a great step to quickly and orderly reallocate the spectrum to commercial wireless use.  It also further establishes the private market option as the lead proposal to do so.  I am impressed and pleased to learn the new alliance will be run by an experienced hand, Preston Padden, who knows how to get projects completed.”