6/2 FCC Public Interest Spectrum Coalition TV White Spaces Reply Comments

New America's Open Technology Institute wrote and submitted reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) with Public Interest Spectrum Coalition (PISC) allies Public Knowledge, Consumer Reports, Access Humboldt, Next Century Cities, Common Cause, Tribal Digital Village Network, the Schools, Health & Libraries Broadband (SHLB) Coalition, National Digital Inclusion Alliance, Benton Institute for Broadband and Society, and X-Lab urging the Commission to adopt robust new rules governing the use of TV White Spaces (TVWS). In the reply comments, PISC responds to a host of arguments in the record and highlights the broad support for changes to the TVWS rules to facilitate high-speed broadband deployments in rural, tribal, and other hard-to-serve areas. A summary is available below:

First, the record shows overwhelming agreement among commenters that more robust rules for TV White Space (TVWS) use would improve connectivity in rural, tribal, and other unserved and underserved areas. Commenters making these arguments in the record include consumer and rural digital equity advocates, technology companies, rural wireless internet service providers (“WISPs”), and free market groups—these groups all detail how improving the rules would expand broadband availability and help bridge the digital divide. Specifically, commenters underscore the importance of TVWS to affordably extend broadband in unserved areas around the country, how White Space Databases (“WSDBs”) can protect incumbents from harmful interference, and how the most prominent obstacle to much greater use of TVWS to address rural digital divide is the presence of unnecessarily restrictive and outdated rules.

Second, the record shows strong support for terrain-based or other real-world propagation models for WSDs, particularly the Longley-Rice Irregular Terrain Model. The Commission should heed these calls and update the TVWS rules by authorizing or requiring WSDBs to utilize one or more terrain-based propagation models to calculate allowable channels, power and HAAT at a particular location. This would provide an important change to the current rules that require WSDBs to over-protect TV viewers within standardized and static contours calculated through the use of an unrealistic and overly restrictive free space propagation model that fails to take basic geographic features (e.g., mountains, dense forests) into account.

Third, the record shows strong support for the Commission’s finding that allowing fixed WSD operations to operate at a higher EIRP limit in less congested areas—which includes predominantly rural, tribal, and other underserved and unserved areas—will allow TVWS networks improve broadband coverage at a lower cost. In particular, commenters support the Commission’s proposal to increase the maximum height above average terrain (“HAAT”) to 500 meters for fixed WSDs operating with at least 6 megahertz separation from TV stations, as it would empower internet service providers (ISPs) to serve communities and locations where deployment would otherwise be too expensive. For rural broadband providers in particular, the flexibility to deploy at a higher power as well as at higher elevation is an important factor in the availability and affordability of rural broadband.

Fourth, most commenters agree that the Commission’s proposal to authorize higherpower TV White Space devices (“WSDs”) on moveable platforms that can operate within a geofence will improve broadband availability in key contexts such as for education and agriculture. Since WSDBs are fully capable of verifying the availability of vacant channels within a geofence, devices should be able to operate at the highest available fixed power level.

Fifth, the record shows strong support for the Commission to authorize higher power operations on channels immediately adjacent to television operations, including by fixed WSDs operating with a 3 megahertz separation from an occupied TV channel. The Commission’s current rules were drafted a decade ago, when both geolocation databases and dynamic sharing were unproven and meant the Commission’s restrictive rules were necessary. However, the engineering evidence in the record now clearly shows there is no reason to unnecessarily limit the utility of the band, particularly when making these changes could allow for more efficient use of the spectrum and help bridge the digital divide in rural, tribal, and other hard-to-serve areas.

Sixth, the Commission should authorize directional antennas and sectorization to make sure providers are able to best use this spectrum for fixed point-to-multipoint service. This use case can be readily calculated and verified by the WSDBs (likely as a value-added service). It will empower providers to deliver more affordable and higher-speed broadband in targeted locations without increasing the risk of harmful interference to incumbents.

Seventh, the record reflects widespread support for the Commission’s proposed change of creating a new designation of narrowband WSDs with technical rules to support applications relevant to the emerging Internet of Things (IoT) such as remote monitoring, SCADA and other innovations.