The National Spectrum Consortium, made up of hundreds of companies with a vested interest in freeing up more wireless spectrum, has launched an effort to work with the government to do just that.

The consortium has launched the “Partnering to Advance Trusted and Holistic Spectrum Solutions (PATHSS) Task Group,” whose goal is to collaborate with the Department of Defense to find more midband to share.

Also Read: 3.45-GHZ Auction Tops Reserve Price

The Federal Communications Commission is currently auctioning 100 MHz of midband spectrum the Defense Department identified in the 3.45 GHz band as bandwidth it could free up or share, provided there were sufficient interference protections.

The new task force is looking for similar help in the 3.1-3.45 GHz band in particular.

The task force is open to any consortium member, a laundry list that includes universities, tech companies, consultants and many more — as well as any government officials. A subset of the group will be established that will have access to classified information so they can get a sense of DOD's needs.

NSC task forces generally come up with recommended practices, studies and reports and other input for standards bodies or regulators.

As legislators in the House and Senate Armed Service Committees try to hammer out a final version of the National Defense Authorization Act, they are getting some advice from colleagues about using some ad dollars on local broadcast and print media.

The authorization includes the Department of Defense's almost two-thirds of the roughly $1 billion the federal government spends on advertising and marketing.

Related: Heroes Act Passes with Broadcast Aid Bucks

In a letter to committee leadership four members of Congress--a Republican and Democrat from both the House and Senate, argue that given the pandemic-related challenges for local media, the Department of Defense can boost those important businesses. "Right now, the need for reliable news and information is as important as ever," they said. "Our radio and television broadcasters and newspapers provide local and national news, emergency alerts, educational programs, and more to all corners of the United States – information that can and often does have security implications."

But they add that given the loss of ad revenue during the pandemic, the long-term viability of local journalism is at risk.

They are asking specifically that the following language in the House bill  be what is ultimately used: "It is the sense of Congress that the Chiefs of the Armed Forces, in coordination with the Recruiting Commands of the Armed Forces, should give all due consideration to the use of local broadcasting and traditional news publishers when advertising."

The Wireless Internet Service Providers Association (WISPA) said the Department of Defense should definitely not insert that government into the private sector's role in 5G by nationalizing a 5G network.

DOD has asked for comment on government partnering with the private sector to secure the next generation of wireless internet access, which will be the conduit for an internet of things (IoT) world that will connect myriad systems from the power grid to medical devices to toasters.

Related: USTA, NCTA Oppose Nationalized 5G

WISPA said it is fine with looking at innovative ways to share spectrum between federal and nonfederal users, which it said could help close the rural digital divide, but says that the government should definitely not "pursue any approach that substitutes central government planning for a market-driven wireless infrastructure approach that has served millions of American consumers well for decades.

"The federal government does not need to own or even directly operate commercial networks, but can utilize “private networks” and can operate isolated networks within networks in which the control, security, and operational aspects of the network function as if they are entirely under the government's control," it said. "In addition, a model in which DoD leases spectrum under a revenue-sharing arrangement would tend to disfavor small providers that cannot provide DoD with sufficient scale."

Related: House Democrats Investigate DOD 5G Plans

WISPA associates itself with a letter from 19 senators that says “nationalizing 5G and experimenting with untested models for 5G deployment is not the way the United States will win the 5G race.” 

WISPA argues that such an approach, though meant to protect the network, would actually raise its own security concerns.

The Democratic leadership of the House Energy & Commerce Committee and Communications Subcommittee have launched an investigation into the Department of Defense's "apparent moves" to own and operate a nationalized 5G network that commercial users would be leasing from the government.

They say that doing so without Congress' approval would be illegal.

That follows DOD's request of information (RFI) on such a network and reports that a request for proposal was already in the works--making the RFI appear window dressing, and that it could be "politically motivated."

Related: Conservative Groups Back GOP Pushback on Nationalized 5G

DOD also Thursday (Oct. 8) announced it was putting $600 million into test beds for dual-use 5G network related tech, on which it would team with the private sector and academia.

In letters to the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), chairman of the House E&C, and Communications Subcommittee chairman Mike Doyle (D-Pa.), expressed their concerns and said that "any attempt by DoD to construct, operate or maintain a commercial communications network or lease government spectrum to commercial entities without the express permission of Congress could be unlawful."

They called for a GAO legal analysis, which GAO will then undertake since part of its job is to act on such requests from legislators, and wanted NTIA to answer a bunch of questions related to the potential political motives, including whether anyone from the White House or the Trump campaign had contacted NTIA about the RFI, whether Republican operatives Karl Rove, Peter Thiel of Newt Gingrich had contacted them, and whether NTIA knows anything about a possible RFP.

They cite reports that lobbyists and political operatives may be pushing the nationalized 5G network for the benefit of one company, Rivada, that has long championed such a network that it could build and operate using its sharing technology.

Given that FCC chairman Ajit Pai and the other commissioners have all told Congress they oppose a nationalized 5G network, Pallone and Doyle also want to know if that is NTIA's position as well.

“We thank Chairmen Pallone and Doyle for their leadership on this important issue," said Kelly Cole, SVP of government affairs for CTIA. "Private-sector solutions and free-market principles are critical to ensuring America leads in 5G, and it’s important to take a hard look at the dangers of nationalizing our wireless networks.”

Those concerned about the Department of Defense and its role in 5G networks faced another potential front Thursday with DOD's announcement of $600 million in awards for 5G dual-use experiments.

The experiments at five military test sites, are being billed as the largest "full-scale 5G tests for dual-use applications in the world."

Related: Conservative Groups Back GOP Pushback on Nationalized 5G

Each installation will partner with industry and academics on things like augmented reality, smart warehouses and 5G for enhancing distributed command and control.

"[T]oday’s announcement demonstrates the Department’s commitment to exploring the vast potential applications and dual-use opportunities that can be built upon next-generation networks,” said Michael Kratsios, acting under secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering.

The test sites are Hill Air Force Base, Utah; Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Washington; Marine Corps Logistics Base Albany, Georgia; Naval Base San Diego; and Nellis Air Force Base, Las Vegas.

They were chosen, according to the White House, because they could "provide streamlined access to spectrum bands and mature fiber and wireless infrastructure, support new or improved infrastructure requirements, and conduct controlled experimentation with dynamic spectrum sharing."

DOD has sought input on a nationalized 5G network that the government and private industry would share.

Top House Democrats are pushing back on a Defense Department request for information (RFI) on creating a government-owned 5G network. 

At last week's FCC oversight hearing, none of the five commissioners supported the prospect of such a nationalized network, something House Energy & Commerce Committee Chairman Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) and Communications Subcommittee Chairman Mike Doyle (D-Pa.) pointed out in issuing a statement in opposition to the RFI.

“The Department of Defense’s RFI on the creation of a government-owned and operated 5G network will do nothing but slow the deployment of this critical technology," they said. "The plan appears specifically crafted to enrich President Trump’s cronies and undermines the careful and complicated work done by the FCC and the NTIA to allocate this spectrum for commercial use. Just last week, every FCC Commissioner – including Chairman Pai – were united in opposing ‘a nationalized 5G network.’

“Worse still, our government appears to be backtracking on President Trump’s commitment last month that ‘the American wireless industry will be able to build and operate 5G networks.’ The confusion he and his Administration are creating will surely set us back in the race to 5G.”

The Trump Administration is making 100 MHz of midband spectrum available for FCC auction by December 2021, according to the White House, and use by commercial 5G providers at full power ASAP, at least on the government timeline. 

The move was billed as strengthening U.S. leadership in 5G. 

Related: Trump Calls for National Spectrum Strategy 

White House and DOD officials said Monday (Aug. 10) that they had identified spectrum between 3450 and 3550 GHz currently used by DOD for key radar applications, that could be freed up quickly for sharing with commercial 5G without sacrificing national security or military uses, specifically critical radar for air defense, missile and gun control, battlefield weapon locations, air traffic control, and more. 

The Administration will work with industry on the sharing regime, which will require ongoing coordination.  

Related: White House Cites Progress in Closing Rural Digital Divide 

The White House and DOD worked quickly to identify the spectrum and free it up as quickly as possible, but due to statute it must be done on an 18-month time frame, though an official speaking on background pointed out that the time frame for federal spectrum to get to market can often be six or seven years, so the timeline was fast in that context.  

A DOD spokesperson said it worked on an unprecedented 15-week schedule to find the spectrum, with Secretary of Defense Mark Esper leading the effort and working with the National Telecommunications & Information Administration to devise a spectrum sharing framework. 

Related: FCC, Pentagon Go to War Over 5G Spectrum

Michael Kratsios, chief technology officer in the White House Office of Science and Technology and deputy assistant to the President called it the fastest transfer of spectrum from federal use to commercial in history--the White House and DoD started work on finding the spectrum back in April. He said that the "critically needed" spectrum could be available for commercial use by mid-2022.  

He said the decision on the 100 MHZ came after the White House and DOD "rigorously analyzed" the spectrum in what he called an "unprecedented collaboration." He said that spectrum will be for contiguous, coast-to-coast deployment at full power levels. 

He called it a groundbreaking achievement, but one that built on other actions, like streamlining 5G buildouts and "taking decisive action to secure domestic networks." 

Kratsios said the U.S. "will continue to build the best 5G networks." Winning the race to 5G has been a priority for the administration. 

DOD and other agencies, as well as many in Congress, have butted heads with the FCC over sharing spectrum in other parts of the band, including 24 GHz and adjacent to the GPS satellite band, where the FCC wants to allow Ligado to set up its terrestrial broadband service. 

White House officials had no comment on whether this new spectrum was related to its opposition to the FCC freeing up spectrum elsewhere. 

“I commend the President and Department of Defense for today’s announcement that the 3.45-3.55 GHz band will be made available for commercial 5G deployment," said FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, adding that it was a "key milestone" in making sure the U.S. leads in 5G. "I also would like to thank FCC staff for their work to help create a framework that will promote 5G service in this important band. Together with the spectrum being made available for 5G in the C-band as well as the 3.5 GHz band, we are now on track to have a 530-megahertz swath of mid-band spectrum available for 5G from 3.45 to 3.98 GHz. The FCC looks forward to moving quickly to adopt service rules for the 3.45 GHz band and then hold an auction to bring this prime mid-band spectrum to market.”

“Opening up this critical block of mid-band spectrum for full power commercial operations will enhance U.S. competitiveness in the 5G ecosystem," said CTIA President Meredith Attwell Baker. "We applaud the White House and Pentagon for finding ways to promote our nation’s leadership of the emerging 5G economy while safeguarding vital defense operations.”

Claude Aiken, President and CEO of the Wireless Internet Service Providers Association (WISPA), said his members were "greatly encouraged" by the news. "Spectrum is finite, and it must be shared if Americans are to gain the full benefits of wireless broadband," said Aiken. "The CBRS band shows that a viable framework can be employed to do so – one which both protects national security and allows for commercial use." (The FCC is currently auctioning CBRS spectrum, with gross proceeds totaling $3,036,705,271 at press time after 34 rounds.) 

"We want to thank all involved for working through the numerous complex technical arrangements to make available this valuable mid-band spectrum. This sharing will benefit Americans, keeping them safe on the home front, and providing more of the fuel providers and the industry need to bring broadband to hungry consumers." 

A number of supporters of the FCC's Ligado decision have warned Congress not to try to use the appropriations process--via language in the FY2021 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)--to undo that decision at the behest of the Defense Department, saying it would be tantamount to sabotaging the FCC's spectrum authority. 

Related: FCC Proposes Approving Ligado Application

The FCC has already unanimously granted the Ligado proposal (formerly LightSquared) to use satellite spectrum adjacent to GPS spectrum for terrestrial broadband so long as it meets various conditions to prevent interference with that adjacent GPS, but that hasn't stopped critics on the Hill and in the Trump Administration from slamming the decision and trying to reverse it.  

Related: Senate Commerce Hosts Rousing Ligado Debate 

In a letter to congressional leaders, Public Knowledge, INCOMPAS, the Open Technology Institute and others pointed to efforts by the Department of Defense, which said Ligado would cause interference to critical systems like missile guidance, to block the decision. 

"As we write, there are intense efforts underway to do exactly that, via current language in the House and Senate versions of the FY2021 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that ultimately seek to reverse the FCC’s recent bipartisan and unanimous approval of Ligado Networks’ regulatory plans," they wrote.  

Related: FCC Faces Slew of Ligado-Slamming Petitions

They argued that would give DOD a veto of commercial spectrum authorizations. "While we respect the role of the Armed Service Committees to provide legislative oversight of the nation’s military, by rule of law, commercial spectrum decisions remain the sole authority of the FCC. Congress should not attempt to sabotage that authority..." 

Also signing on to the letter were the California Center for Rural Policy, Center for Rural Strategies, Lincoln Network, Media Alliance, Taxpayers Protection Alliance and Wireless Infrastructure Association. 

The FCC's decision to allow a new terrestrial broadband service alongside spectrum for critical GPS uses drew fire from both sides of the aisle, as well as top military brass and one famous pilot, in a hearing in the Senate Armed Services Committee Wednesday (May 6). 

Even the iconic Sully Sullenberger weighed in on the decision, and he was not happy. 

The Committee held a hearing Wednesday on the FCC's decision last month to allow Ligado networks to launch a terrestrial broadband service, a service that the Department of Defense and other agencies have argued could interfere with key GPS tech in adjacent spectrum.  

The military brass in attendance had not changed their marching orders or their target, and the committee's chairman and ranking member were clearly in bipartisan agreement with DOD. 

Related: FCC Approves Ligado Terrestrial Broadband Service 

The hearing was essentially a chance for DOD to air its grievances. In fact, the witnesses were all from the defense side of the argument, though the committee made no pretense to it being other than hearing from the Department of Defense--an admiral, a general, an undersecretary and the DOD CIO--about their spectrum policy and concerns with the impact of the FCC decision and Ligado on national security. 

Ligado took some issue with the fact that there were no witnesses scheduled from Ligado or from the FCC at the hearing. 

The hearing was conducted under social distancing guidelines as the Senate returned to work during the pandemic, which included masks and cleaning supplies at people's seats. 

Committee Chairman James Inhofe (R-Okla.) approved a couple of thousand military appointments with the voice vote and the stroke of a pen before weighing in on the issue. 

In a bad sign for Ligado, he was clearly impressed by the witnesses, saying it was one of the most impressive and said the issue "could be damaging to the country if something went wrong."  

He said the issue boiled down to risk and said that risk should not come at the benefit of one company and its investors. He seemed convinced that Ligado's service would interfere with GPS, including military guidance systems. He said such interference with GPS would hurt the entire economy. At the end of the day, economic security is national security." 

Inhofe said the issue was not winning the race to 5G, which he supported, but with that national security.   

He said a few powerful people had rushed a hasty decision over the weekend (referring to the FCC) that the President (a big DOD fan) was not clued-in on, something he said he knew first hand was the case.  

Ranking member Jack Reed (D-R.I.) opposed the FCC decision and said the hearing was essential, though he understood why some might want them to be looking at something COVID-19 related in their return to a pandemic-changed country.  

Reed was no happier with Ligado and potential GPS interference, or with the FCC for granting the license, which he said was problematic for a number of reasons, including that it did not recognize the complexity of defense systems and the difficulty of replacing a GPS card. "I don't believe the FCC decision is in the public interest," he said.   

Michael Griffin, under secretary of defense for research and engineering, said that GPS was designed under the expectation that ground-based transmitters would not be allowed because they drown out weak GPS signals. Now, he said, Ligado would be transmitting loud signals right next door.  

He also said the replacement of GPS equipment due to Ligado would give China an opportunity to replace some of that equipment. 

Allowing Ligado next door would mean GPS receivers would trying to listen for the rustle of leaves through the noise of 100 jets all at once. And he said that comparison was actually favorable to Ligado because he could not fit more than 100 jets on the chart he was displaying.  

He said it will cost hundreds of billions of dollars and decades of time to replace GPS equipment to deal with that disparity. 

Griffin also said it is a myth that Ligado is not crucial to the buildout of 5G 

General John W. Raymond, chief of space operations, United States Space Force, and commander, U.S. space command, said GPS capability is irrelevant if receivers on the ground can't process them, and those signals are Less than a millionth of a billionth of a watt, he said, requiring a noise-pristine environment, the "quiet car" as it were.  

He said the Ligado ground emitters will interfere with GPS, and the FCC-adopted buffer zone won't mitigate the interference risk. Bottom line, he said, the Ligado service puts space capabilities at risk.  

He strongly opposed the use of the spectrum for terrestrial emitters, which he said would cede ground in the new space race to Russia and China. 

President Trump is a big fan of the space force, which he created. 

Dana Deasy, chief information officer at DOD, said that the FCC and Ligado had played bait and switch, that the risks of allowing the Ligado service far outweigh any benefits, and the FCC needs to reverse the decision.  

Retired Admiral Thad W. Allen said he had talked to his friend, Capt. Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger--who safely landed his disabled plane on the Hudson river--about the impact of the Ligado service on the aviation industry. Sully called it "wrongheaded and dangerous," he said. 

Update:Sullenberger retweeted this story following the hearing, making even clearer his continued unhappiness with the FCC's decision:

[embed]https://twitter.com/Captsully/status/1258505171874623489[/embed]

Republican FCC commissioner Michael O'Rielly has asked President Trump to lean on the Department of Defense to free up spectrum for 5G.

That came in an April 8 letter to Trump from O'Rielly, who is a fan of the President.

O'Rielly praised the President's "extraordinary leadership" on "all communications policy matters" before getting to the ask, which was his direct intervention to get DOD to "reduce its spectrum footprint in a timely manner to promote 5G services."

But while the President has made winning the race to 5G a priority, he is also historically deferential to the military.

O'Rielly included praise for both Trump and his efforts to boost the military, but said freeing up 5G did not threaten that legacy or the national defense.

Related: CTIA ID's more GI Spectrum for 5G

"Under your direction, the U.S. military has been vastly improved and better funded to ensure it regains its prominence as the finest and strongest force ever seen on the face of the Earth," he said. "At the same time, it is clear that more can be done to improve spectrum efficiency within DoD. Indeed, the reallocation of spectrum from DoD is not mutually exclusive with national security and must be pursued for the betterment of the American people and to ensure the continued success of our military under your leadership."

He said that the only potential source of huge tracts of midband spectrum for commercial 5G wireless were to be found in the hands of Federal departments and agencies and that they had been reluctant to part with it, especially DOD, "the largest holder of the most ideal mid-band spectrum."

He gave the distinct impression DOD could be renamed DOSD, the Department of Spectrum Defense, saying it was "exceptionally reluctant to part with one single megahertz. Simply put, every excuse, delay tactic, and political chit is used to prevent the repurposing of any spectrum."

CTIA-the Wireless Association president Meredith Attwell Baker added her member's support to O'Rielly's effort.

“We share Commissioner O’Rielly’s concerns about the lack of a mid-band spectrum pipeline," she said. "We are long overdue for action on the 3 GHz band and we need the administration to quickly clear a significant portion of that spectrum to help drive our future 5G economy." 

T-Mobile's proposal to merge with Sprint has received the okay from the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) and the so-called Team Telecom review by the Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Security and Department of Defense.

T-Mobile and Sprint filed the proposed deal with the FCC June 18.

That means the government apparently does not have a national security issue with the fact that UK-based SoftBank Capital will have 27% of the combined company and Saudi Arabia has invested billions in SoftBank's tech-focused Vision Fund, or the fact that Netherlands-based T-Mobile parent Deutsche Telecom could have up to 100% of indirect ownership in a merged T-Mobile-Sprint combo, or concerns about Chinese telecom tech in the merged network.

Team Telecom reviews mergers with foreign ownership for potential national security issues and T-Mobile says it has told the FCC it has no objection to the deal.

Related: FCC Using Outside Economist to Vet AT&T-T-Mobile

While DOJ is part of the CFIUS sign-off, the department is still conducting its antitrust review, and the FCC its public interest and competition review of the deal, which would combine the number three and number four carriers, which would consolidate the market, but T-Mobile says that would create a stronger disrupter of the top two former Baby Bells--AT&T and Verizon--and critics say would dull that disrupter edge and reduce competition.

“We are pleased to achieve both of these important milestones in the journey to build the New T-Mobile," said T-Mobile CEO John Legere. "We are a step closer to offering customers a supercharged disrupter that will create jobs from day one and deliver a real alternative to fixed broadband while delivering the first broad and deep nationwide 5G network for the United States...We look forward to continuing our discussions with the remaining regulatory agencies reviewing our transaction to share our story and subsequently achieve similar positive results.”

The deal will be a merger of Sprint into T-Mobile as an indirect subsidiary of T-Mobile and a direct subsidiary of T-Mobile USA, which is itself a subsidiary of T-Mobile. John Legere, CEO of T-Mobile will be CEO of the combined company, with T-Mobile president Mike Sievert serving as president and COO of the combined company.

Al Jazeera America will debut the three-part story Burn Pits tonight, where veterans discuss their illnesses and their fight for government compensation from the practice in Iraq and Afghanistan, the network announced today.

Consider This will air the first report at 10 p.m. tonight (Dec. 1), while parts two and three will debut Dec. 2 at 9 p.m. on America Tonight.

Sheila MacVicar delves into the crisis of burn pits, where thousands of troops have been affected with life-altering illnesses, such as cancer and respiratory disease. 

The show presents stories from veterans and their families as they strive for compensation from the DOD and VA. MacVicar also brings viewers to the doctor at the forefront of the diagnosis, as he finds out about the continuation of burn pits, which was made unlawful in 2009.

The practice is used  at U.S. military bases in Iraq and Afghanistan to burn trash, including metals, cars, electronics and human waste, which is in turn releases toxins into the air.  

Along with victims, a former VA official and whistleblower is interviewed, where he says the DOD is not taking responsibility for the link between veterans' illnesses and burn pits.