CSMAC Subcommittee Looks at Folding NTIA, FCC Into One

The report was supposed to be based on the Trump administration’s long-awaited spectrum strategy, but NTIA officials warned subcommittee leaders last month that report wouldn’t be available before they completed their initial work (see 2006160055). Subcommittee leaders didn’t comment Tuesday.

“This is a rich topic and we have barely scratched the surface -- NTIA should consider whether CSMAC should continue this work, and in what aspects,” said a subcommittee presentation posted Tuesday. “Given that the current CSMAC term ends in eight months, we recommend that, to the extent NTIA desires work to continue in the current CSMAC, that the scope of work be narrowed for a second report.” One possibility, the committee suggested: “NTIA could direct our focus to non-statutory reform options.” The working group held more than 20 meetings and looked at U.S. statutes and regulations, plus “international spectrum management regimes,” said the report.

The current spectrum management regime is more the 100 years old and was developed before the advent of wireless and satellite communications, 5G, the IoT, or all the advances that technology makes possible, the report said. “Given this technical and economic paradigm shift, there is an opportunity to update our current system to remove artificial limitations, manage spectrum more holistically, and optimize the use of this precious national resource,” the report argued: “A more efficient, effective, flexible, and sustainable spectrum access approach will help alleviate the growing demand to meet the needs of a 21st century national spectrum strategy.”

The report said options for making federal spectrum management more agile all carry risks. The subcommittee noted questions about combining spectrum oversight. “By introducing a profound change in federal decision-making, what is the period of uncertainty and disruption that would reasonably be expected before the new entity was effectively stood up and operating with timely decision-making capacity?” the report asked: “Are there collateral issues (e.g., retention of personnel, private sector impacts, negative impacts to government spectrum planning, or others) with this proposed change, and how could they be mitigated?”

Every couple of years, “someone recommends that the U.S. have just one regulator for everything associated with spectrum,” said Cooley’s Robert McDowell. “These proposals generate scholarly think tank pieces and garner applause from some quarters and boos from others,” he told us: “It never happens because it is so difficult to restructure government that fundamentally. There’s never the political will do actually do it. ... It’s not impossible to accomplish, but the odds are slim.”

It’s unsurprising the subcommittee didn’t recommend one alternative, said Public Knowledge Senior Vice President Harold Feld, a former CSMAC member. “A system designed to make it easier to reduce the federal spectrum footprint is not going to please agencies that are tired of constantly defending their spectrum allocations,” Feld told us: “A system designed to give federal agencies long-term certainty is not going to satisfy those who want to get more spectrum into commercial use. Sometimes, the only thing you can do is lay out all the options for the political leadership.”

“The interdepartment radio advisory committee within the NTIA generally governs all federal radio operations, but there aren't many incentives for existing federal operations to use their existing rights as efficiently as possible,” said Jeffrey Westling, R Street Institute fellow. “Conflicts between the federal operators and the FCC have become more pronounced,” he said. “We have already seen significant fights in the 24 GHz band and the Ligado proceeding between federal users and the FCC's allocation decisions, and the 3.1-3.55 GHz study has moved slowly in part because there isn't much incentive for the [DOD] or the NTIA to push forward.” Westling said there are other ways to fix the process, like fees for federal spectrum users, that don’t require sweeping changes.

“The core problem” in the U.S. is that spectrum “is largely assigned by committee without price signals,” said Mercatus Center Senior Research Fellow Brent Skorup. “This is a legacy of the fact that spectrum assignment began in earnest in the 1920s and 1930s when central planning was in vogue,” he said. For other public assets, the analyst noted, "agencies and commercial users show their need for the resource by paying.”