NTIA and NextNav Agree on Testing for 900 MHz Proposal
NTIA urged the FCC to defer action for now on NextNav's proposal that would reconfigure the 902-928 MHz band, "enabl[ing] a high-quality, terrestrial complement” to GPS for positioning, navigation and timing (PNT) services (see 2404160043). NextNav, meanwhile, defended the proposal but agreed testing is needed. Other commenters objected to the proposal, reflecting concerns raised in initial comments (see 2409060046). Replies were due Friday in docket 24-240; many were posted Monday.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
NTIA proposed that the FCC instead grant NextNav a “short-term experimental license” so it can field test its use of the band. The filing was made on behalf of the Department of Transportation and reflected its concerns.
"A test plan should be provided that specifies how such testing will address the concerns of each affected mode of transportation,” NTIA said: “Working with transportation stakeholders, the testing must demonstrate that the NextNav system will not cause harmful interference to, or operationally degrade, transportation incumbents pursuant to Commission rules.”
NextNav agreed with NTIA’s call for testing, ensuring "that railroad and tolling operations in the lower 900 MHz band continue to thrive,” NextNav CEO Mariam Sorond said in an emailed statement. “We are pleased the FCC leadership and expert staff can begin to evaluate NextNav's proposal," Sorond said: “We remain committed to working with stakeholders through engineer-to-engineer dialogue and by conducting necessary testing.”
The NextNav proposal “offers the only concrete opportunity to enable a widescale terrestrial PNT service -- one that has a clear path to availability in consumer devices such as cellphones -- without spending taxpayer dollars,” NextNav said in reply comments. The company acknowledged filings outlining other use cases for the band. “These technologies can be accommodated in a modernized band plan, where opportunities for coexistence abound.”
But other reply comments opposed the proposal.
“The record establishes with overwhelming evidence that the Lower 900 MHz Band is intensively used by a wide variety of industries and their customers -- contrary to a core premise of the NextNav Petition that the band is lightly used and can be easily repurposed,” said a filing the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and dozens of other groups, from the transportation, utility, manufacturing, Wi-Fi and other industries endorsed: “Against this evidence of harm and a broad chorus to reject or dismiss the NextNav Petition, the record reflects scant support for the NextNav Petition.”
The comments so far "overwhelmingly oppose NextNav’s Petition, and ... echo UTC’s concern that NextNav’s proposed operations would cause harmful interference and congestion that would prevent or impair the operation of tens of millions of Part 15 unlicensed devices," UTC said. These uses include utility advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) and supervisory control and data acquisition systems (SCADA), the group said. UTC said there are “less disruptive alternatives available” and “the purported benefits are overstated.” Reconfiguration of the band would be “a massive windfall for NextNav, contrary to the public interest as well as the Commission’s statutory authority.”
Edison Electric Institute members “rely heavily on the Lower 900 MHz band for SCADA and AMI applications,” EEI said: “These systems are essential for the safe, reliable, and efficient operation of the electric grid.” Introduction of high-powered 5G and location services in the band “could lead to increased interference, affecting the signal integrity of metering systems and potentially requiring frequent disruptive retuning of AMI communications equipment.”
NextNav’s technology, the Wireless ISP Association said, “is not necessarily unique, is not universally accepted, and has not been sufficiently proven, and there are other viable solutions or combinations of systems that can provide similar PNT capabilities without requiring any additional spectrum or any relocation of existing users.” The response to NextNav’s petition “has been enormous, resulting in a deep record that overwhelmingly demonstrates why the Petition should be denied,” WISPA said.
Motorola Solutions objected on behalf of public safety and other users of its gear. “Hundreds of millions of innovative, unlicensed devices serving a multitude of use cases and applications have been designed to operate in this specific band because of the more robust operating environment it provides,” Motorola said. The NextNav proposal would remove interference protections on which these users rely, the company said: NextNav “would undermine the ‘billions of dollars’ invested by manufacturers and users into devices now operating in the band as a direct result of the FCC’s policies.”
In the initial comments, “not one consumer group, wireless carrier, or broadband provider endorsed the NextNav Petition,” the Security Industry Association commented. “It would take pages and pages just to list the hundreds of opponents, much less to discuss their statements and demonstrations as to how NextNav’s proposals would harm the band’s users,” Itron said.