 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
U.S. Deployment of Third Generation Wireless Services: When Will It Happen and Where Will It Happen?"
Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet
Dr. Linton Wells
1.
Introduction Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the subcommittee, for inviting me to speak on this issue of the utmost importance to our military forces, allocating radio frequency (RF) spectrum. As the Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence, I am responsible for spectrum policy and management within DoD. The issue of finding spectrum in the United States for Third Generation Wireless ("3G") services illustrates the growing demand for spectrum in both the commercial and government sectors. The Department of Defense's needs for spectrum are growing along with those of other organizations. For example, the satellite bandwidth used in Operation Allied Force in Kosovo was two and one half times the bandwidth used in Desert Storm nine years earlier, while the Kosovo force was one tenth the size. Work done at the Department of Defense has projected significant growth in military spectrum requirements in all functional areas over the next few years (see Figure 1). Access to adequate RF spectrum was critical to US Forces' success in Desert Storm and Kosovo and will continue to be crucial to the Department's ability to transform itself into a leaner, more agile, and more effective force that can meet the security challenges of the future at reasonable cost to the taxpayers. Fundamental to this transformation is the network-centric concept of operations which is already being implemented. RF spectrum is virtually the only way to connect mobile ground forces, ships, aircraft, and satellites. 2.
DoD Use of the Federal Government 1755-1850 MHz Band As you know, the Federal government band from 1755-1850 MHz is one of the bands under consideration for 3G. DoD uses this band for satellite control, battlefield radio relay, aircrew combat training, precision weapons guidance, and many other important functions. The band was picked for these functions because the signals at these frequencies propagate in ways that make the spectrum ideal for mobile communications. Altogether more than 100 DoD systems, and a more than equal number of systems from other Federal agencies, utilize this band. Figure 2 depicts many of the uses. I will briefly describe each of the major functions resident in the 1755 MHz band. The control uplinks for all DoD and Intelligence Community satellites (more than 120 satellites representing a cumulative investment of about $100B) use the 1755 MHz band. These satellites perform communications, positioning and timing, surveillance and reconnaissance, weather observation, and other functions crucial to warfighting and to decision-making by National Command authorities, including the President, the Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as well as other senior military decisionmakers. DoD's Global Positioning System satellites have become crucial parts of the national civilian/military infrastructure supporting global navigation and positioning requirements for air, land and sea vessels. GPS serves functions that are as important as the functions provided by railroads and telecommunications systems. The battlefield radio relay systems in this band form the long-haul backbone of the Army and Marine tactical internets. They let our ground forces to share situational awareness and coordinate their operations in real time across the extended battlefield, as well as to ships off-shore. The Air Force and Navy aircrew combat training system, which provides realistic training with engagement assessment and feedback, is one of the main reasons American pilots are the best-trained combat pilots in the world. The most accurate air-launched precision weapons in the Services' inventories are guided by data links using the Federal band. These weapons are often used by commanders to ensure the highest probability of mission accomplishment with the fewest possible civilian casualties. Virtually all of the these systems played a key role in the Allied victory in Kosovo. The success of this operation would have been unlikely without satellite-based communications, navigation, and reconnaissance, without well-trained combat aircrews, without precision-guided weapons, and without tactical radio relay systems. Other important DoD systems that use the Federal band, include Combat Identification, soldier radios, and weapon scoring. In an era of reduced force structure, increased mission responsibilities and fewer soldiers, sailors and airmen, these systems serve to enhance significantly our operational capabilities. Enhanced knowledge of the battlefield, coupled with precise engagement capabilities obtained from these spectrum dependent, force multipler systems, protect our forces, throughout the full range of U.S. involvement from combat to peacekeeping and humanitarian operations.
I want to say in the most unequivocal
way possible that the loss or degradation of our ability to perform these
crucial functions would have very severe consequences for National Security.
It would result in mission failures and increased casualties in future
operations, and loss of vital intelligence information to the President and
senior leaders. If the Federal
band is to be reallocated, then other suitable spectrum must be found to enable
the displaced functions to be performed without degradation, and we need enough
time to relocate to the new spectrum. 3.
DoD Study Findings The White House-directed study conducted by DoD on accommodating 3G services in the Federal band examined the options of sharing the band, vacating all of the band, or vacating part of it. The study found that sharing the band between 3G services and incumbent DoD systems would not be feasible because there would be too much mutual interference. Vacating or segmenting the band is feasible in theory, provided that comparable spectrum could be allocated to DoD and adequate, timely financial compensation provided, but DoD satellite control systems could not vacate the band before 2017 and non-space systems before 2010. These timelines are driven by fact-of-life considerations including the expected satellite lifetimes, the inability to change the frequencies of on-orbit satellites and time required to design and field new systems in a different frequency band. NTIA's report incorporates the DoD findings. 4. Comparable Spectrum. Let me emphasize again, as a matter of national defense and security, DoD's ability to carry out its operational mission will be jeopardized if the Department is not provided with access to spectrum with appropriate technical characteristics and regulatory protections. The National Defense Authorization Act of 2000 requires that DoD be provided "comparable spectrum" for functions displaced by reallocation of Federal spectrum to meet commercial needs. The Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Secretary of Commerce must jointly certify that any replacement spectrum is comparable. We consider this to mean that the replacement spectrum for different DoD systems has suitable technical characteristics and similar regulatory status so that the displaced function can be performed with no degradation in capability. At this point, DoD believes that it is unlikely that comparable government spectrum can be found for most of the functions presently residing in the 1755 MHz band and, to date, the NTIA and the FCC have not identified such spectrum. Forced relocation of DoD without provision of comparable spectrum will result in the very servere consequences to National Security that I addressed earlier. We are willing to engage with all parties to find a way ahead on spectrum. Nonetheless, we believe that the issue of equivalent spectrum must be resolved before any decisions are made on spectrum for 3G, including any "decision in principle" or "policy decision" on band reallocation. 5. CTIA Proposals In their 3G "briefing book," CTIA has proposed work-arounds for satellite control, tactical radio relay, and air combat training systems to enable accommodation of 3G services in the Federal band earlier than the DoD timelines Our initial assessment is that none of these proposals could be implemented without serious degradation to DoD capabilities. CTIA has not proposed work-arounds for precision guided weapons or many other important DoD systems. CTIA has proposed a "win-win" solution in which DoD would be provided modernization funds, beyond the marginal cost to relocate, as an inducement to accept relocation. We would be interested in seeing what could be included in such a package but have not yet seen such a proposal. Moreover, we emphasize that any such solution could only be viable if DoD is provided access to spectrum with equivalent technical characteristics and regulatory status. While the offer is no doubt made in good faith, a mechanism has not been presented by which it could be implemented in such a way as to produce a genuine win-win situation. 6. Need for Additional Spectrum for 3G in the United States
We were asked in Chairman Upton's
letter of invitation to comment on this issue.
In our view, the case must be updated, refined and timelines for such
spectrum spelled out. The U.S. has
a much lower population density than Europe or Asia, so that requirements for 3G
personal communications devices may be smaller than either of these
regionsFurther, we can expect that technological advances will enable the
wireless industry to wring more use out of their spectrum (just as the DoD is
counting on spectrum-efficient technologies to enable us to meet our growing
needs without demanding more spectrum from the regulators).
Finally, the amount of spectrum needed for 3G is undetermined because the
demand for 3G services is unknown at this point.
Many industry observers believe that second generation wireless services
(personal communications services" or PCS in the United States), with
enhancements (high speed voice and data connection, but not streaming video)
will be sufficient for most truly mobile users. 7.
Candidate Bands for 3G
The
Federal 1755 MHz band is heavily encumbered and would require nearly two decades
to become available, there are other bands readily available to FCC for meeting
the needs of the 3G vendors. Figure
3 lists some of the other bands available. Much of this spectrum was reallocated
from DoD/Federal use to commercial use by earlier legislation and NTIA action
but it has not yet been made available through auction by the FCC.
Altogether there is at least 130 MHz of suitable commercial spectrum that
FCC could make available this year with limited displacement to established
users, and more than 240 MHz could be available within ten years. Another means of meeting the 3G spectrum requirement in full or in part is to provide 3G services on spectrum currently used for PCS or other wireless services, as FCC regulatory flexibility allows and as some 3G vendors are planning. 8.
Harmonization CTIA argues that the Federal band is desired for 3G because it would harmonize U.S. spectrum allocation with 3G allocations around the world. This is not the complete picture. There are at least six bands that WRC-92 and WRC-00 suggested nations consider for 3G. Worldwide harmonization of 3G bands is not happening. Most nations have not yet decided on which band will be used for 3G, and I am not aware of any nation that has auctioned the 1755 MHz band for 3G. In fact, Europe uses the 1755-1850 MHz band for 2G. Europe would need to make regulatory changes before using this spectrum for 3G and probably will not migrate it to 3G for more than a decade. Many nations are waiting to see which band the U.S. picks.
CTIA is now
modifying its position to state that the 1755 MHz band is needed to
enable harmonization of advanced commercial wireless services "in general."
Harmonization is primarily helpful when it can be achieved with respect to a
particular band (such as 2G or 3G) or waveform (such as CDMA, one of the current
U.S. standards for first generation phones, or GSM, the current first generation
standard in Europe and most of Asia). We
have no national commitment to harmonization with respect to 3G implementation. Finally, multi-mode and multi-band phones are available today
and appear to be economically viable.
9. The
Federal Government, including DoD, is managing spectrum judiciously. DoD is not "hoarding" spectrum and using it inefficiently. DoD is granted access to spectrum by NTIA and, in a few cases, by FCC for specific purposes. The need for government spectrum for particular user and uses is reevaluated on an ongoing basis. DoD systems must be designed to a very high level of spectrum efficiency since the lives of servicemen and women are at risk and many military systems must operate in close proximity at the same time, during military operations. We are constantly pursuing new spectrum-efficient technologies. For example, we are fielding multiplexers for our UHF satellite receivers that multiply the number of channels per satellite by a factor of four. I would like to put the relative allocation of bandwidth between industry and the Federal government in proper context. Out of the total amount of spectrum that is appropriate for 3G deployment, generally 700MHz-2700MHz, the Federal government is the exclusive occupant of about 15%. Three times that amount is reserved exclusively for commercial use, and the rest is shared. 10.
Conclusion This issue requires a balancing of economic and national security needs. We should remember that there can be no economic prosperity without national security. Furthermore, the value of national security cannot be measured in dollars. The benefits the nation derives from making spectrum available for Defense are expressed in terms of wars that we won't have to fight, and victories achieved and casualties avoided in the wars we do fight. To summarize the DoD position on this issue, we must have comparable spectrum if we are to relocate, and this must be identified and certified prior to any decision to reallocate the Federal band. If comparable spectrum cannot be identified within the next few months, then the Federal band should be taken "off the table." Forced relocation of DoD without comparable spectrum, or without respect for the transition timelines, as proposed in legislation drafted by CTIA, would cause grave damage to National Security. In effect, without comparable spectrum, we would be risking the lives of our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines. Furthermore, even given comparable spectrum, timely and adequate financial reimbursement, and respect for our transition timelines, it is still not clear that the Federal band should be reallocated. As I have explained, industry's case for needing the Federal band is very weak, there are commercial bands that appear to be more readily available, and a Federal band should be the last resort, not the first resort, for a new commercial need such as 3G. Given that there are risks for DoD in moving to other bands, we would like to see compelling evidence that this is truly in the national interest before agreeing to relocate. The way ahead is for all of us to work together to further assess what band options are feasible and, of the feasible set, which is the best choice for 3G based on mutually-agreed criteria. I believe this process should include an attempt to identify and certify comparable spectrum for DoD if FCC still wishes to consider the Federal band. The United States has global security responsibilities and thus has needs for spectrum for military systems that are far greater than any other nation's requirements. This is part of the benefits and burdens that accrue to our Nation, given our worldwide leadership role in the 21st Century. We will continue to work in a spirit of cooperation and openness with the Congress, other Executive Branch agencies, the FCC and other interested parties to reach the best decision for the nation on this important question. Figure One
Figure Two Is Not Available
Figure Three
|
|||||||||||
|
