Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Unlicensed Use of the 6 GHz Band ) ET Docket No. 18-295 ) Expanding Flexible Use in Mid-Band ) GN Docket No. 17-183 Spectrum Between 3.7 and 24 GHz ) OPPOSITION OF NCTA – THE INTERNET & TELEVISION ASSOCIATION TO PETITIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION Rick Chessen Neal Goldberg Danielle J. Piñeres NCTA – The Internet & Television Association 25 Massachusetts Avenue, NW – Suite 100 Washington, DC 20001-1431 (202) 222-2445 July 29, 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY ......................................................................................... 2 I. THE COMMISSION BASED ITS DECISION TO PERMIT UNLICENSED USE IN THE 6 GHZ BAND ON THOROUGH CONSIDERATION OF THE RECORD AND SOUND TECHNICAL ANALYSIS AND ACCORDINGLY ADOPTED APPROPRIATE PROTECTION MEASURES ........................................ 4 A. The Commission Should Reject FWCC’s Claims that It Failed to Take Sufficient Action to Protect Incumbents Against Harmful Interference ..................... 5 B. FWCC Proposes Burdensome Measures to Address Its Harmful Interference Concerns that the Commission Already Considered and Properly Rejected and that Are neither Necessary nor in the Public Interest ................................................. 10 i. The Commission Correctly Decided Not to Codify an Unnecessary Activity Limit for LPI Devices ........................................................................... 11 ii. The Commission Considered and Declined to Mandate Testing Before LPI Devices Can Be Deployed ........................................................................... 13 II. THE COMMISSION SHOULD NOT RECONSIDER THE POWER LIMITS ADOPTED FOR STANDARD POWER OPERATIONS SUBJECT TO AFC ........ 15 III. THE COMMISSION’S DECISION NOT TO MAKE A PORTION OF THE 6 GHZ BAND AVAILABLE FOR LICENSED FLEXIBLE USE IS NOT ARBITRARY OR CAPRICIOUS OR CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST ...................................................................................................................... 18 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................... 20 Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Unlicensed Use of the 6 GHz Band ) ET Docket No. 18-295 ) Expanding Flexible Use in Mid-Band ) GN Docket No. 17-183 Spectrum Between 3.7 and 24 GHz ) OPPOSITION OF NCTA – THE INTERNET & TELEVISION ASSOCIATION TO PETITIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION NCTA – The Internet & Television Association (NCTA) hereby opposes the petitions for reconsideration of the Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking adopted in the above-captioned proceedings (6 GHz Order and 6 GHz FNPRM)1 that were filed by CTIA,2 the Fixed Wireless Communications Coalition (FWCC),3 and Verizon.4 For the reasons explained below, the Commission should dismiss or deny each of these petitions. 1 Unlicensed Use of the 6 GHz Band; Expanding Flexible Use in Mid-Band Spectrum Between 3.7 and 24 GHz, Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 35 FCC Rcd. 3852 (2020) (6 GHz Order). 2 Petition for Partial Reconsideration of CTIA, ET Docket No. 18-295, GN Docket No. 17-183 (filed June 25, 2020) (CTIA Petition). 3 Fixed Wireless Communications Coalition Petition for Reconsideration, ET Docket No. 18- 295, GN Docket No. 17-183 (filed June 25, 2020) (FWCC Petition). 4 Verizon Petition for Reconsideration, ET Docket No. 18-295, GN Docket No. 17-183 (filed June 25, 2020) (Verizon Petition). INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY Wi-Fi is an indispensable way for American consumers’ “devices to interconnect and access the Internet.”5 As NCTA has explained, “Wi-Fi is an integral technology not just for home and enterprise connectivity, but also for schools and libraries, ports and railyards, precision agriculture and industrial automation.”6 The need for unlicensed spectrum for Wi-Fi and other unlicensed services has reached an inflection point. Additional unlicensed spectrum is essential to support new and innovative services, like Wi-Fi 6, that can benefit rural communities and communities of color, and to meet the voracious demand for Internet connectivity that is more important now than ever.7 By authorizing low-power indoor (LPI) unlicensed use throughout the full 1200 megahertz of the 6 GHz band, the Commission has taken a significant step to address this growing need. However, in reaching this decision, the Commission also recognized the need to “preserve and protect the important base of incumbent users in these frequency bands.”8 To this end, the Commission engaged in a lengthy process to carefully evaluate the feasibility of opening the 6 GHz band for unlicensed use while protecting those incumbent users – including the 5 Unlicensed Use of the 6 GHz Band; Expanding Flexible Use in Mid-Band Spectrum Between 3.7 and 24 GHz, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 33 FCC Rcd. 10496, ¶ 3 (2018) (6 GHz NPRM). 6 Letter from Danielle J. Piñeres, NCTA, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, ET Docket No. 18-295, GN Docket No. 17-183, at 2 (filed Mar. 12, 2020) (NCTA Mar. 12 Letter). 7 See 6 GHz Order ¶¶ 1-2; Letter from Rob Alderfer, Vice President of Technology Policy, CableLabs, et al., to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, ET Docket No. 18-295, GN Docket No. 17-183, at 1 (filed Mar. 25, 2020); see also Remarks of Commissioner Geoffrey Starks, Thriving While Black: The Role of the Media and Communications Technology in Addressing Black Mental Health via Teleconference, July 13, 2020 (underscoring the need to extend telecommunications services to Black communities). 8 6 GHz NPRM ¶ 2. 2 important video production operations of NCTA’s own members – from harmful interference. After thorough and considered analysis of the record, which includes numerous comments and detailed technical studies, the Commission adopted a framework in the 6 GHz Order that reasonably accounts for the interests and concerns of the various stakeholders. As a result, consumers in urban, suburban, and rural communities across the country will soon be able to reap the many benefits of next-generation unlicensed technologies, operating alongside incumbent users who will be fully protected from harmful interference.9 Now three petitioners – CTIA, FWCC, and Verizon – seek to delay or disrupt unlicensed access to this critical spectrum and all the innovation it has the potential to unleash. Under the Commission’s rules, petitions for reconsideration do not warrant the Commission’s consideration if they “[r]ely on arguments that have been fully considered and rejected by the Commission within the same proceeding” or “[f]ail to identify any material error, omission, or reason warranting reconsideration.”10 Moreover, a petition for reconsideration that relies on new facts or arguments not previously presented to the Commission may be granted only if those facts or arguments (1) relate to circumstances or events that changed or occurred after the last opportunity to present them to the Commission; (2) were unknown to the petitioner until after 9 See, e.g., Comments of the Public Interest Spectrum Coalition, ET Docket No. 18-295, GN Docket No. 17-183, at 2 (filed June 29, 2020); Letter from Access Humboldt, Amazon, American Library Association, Apple, Benton Foundation, Boingo, Broadcom, Charter, Cisco, Comcast, Consortium For School Networking, Consumer Action for a Strong Economy, Cypress Semiconductor, Engine, Extreme Networks, Facebook, Google, HP, HP Enterprise, Institute for Liberty, Juniper Networks, Kent County, Maryland, Microsoft, NCTA, Netgear, Open Technology Institute – New America, Public Knowledge, Qorvo, SHLB – Schools, Health & Libraries Broadband Coalition, Tribal Digital Village Network, Wireless Internet Service Providers Association, and Wi-Fi Alliance, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, ET Docket No. 18-295, GN Docket No. 17-183, at 1-2 (filed Feb. 11, 2020) (Big Tent Letter). 10 47 C.F.R. § 1.429(l)(1), (3). 3 such opportunity upon the exercise of ordinary diligence; or (3) that the Commission determines must be considered in the public interest.11 As explained herein, the petitioners have failed to satisfy the Commission’s requirements for reconsideration. Specifically: The Commission thoroughly considered FWCC’s assertions that LPI unlicensed operations would cause harmful interference to incumbent operations and determined that the potential for such interference to occur is negligible. FWCC’s additional technical analysis not only fails to disprove the Commission’s conclusions, but actually demonstrates that Wi-Fi and Fixed Service (FS) operations can successfully coexist. The Commission already has considered and rejected FWCC’s misguided requests to adopt an activity limit for LPI devices and to require additional testing to protect against harmful interference from LPI operations. The Commission likewise considered and rejected Verizon’s and CTIA’s proposal to raise power limits for standard-power devices subject to AFC. It would not be in the public interest to revisit this issue solely because Verizon and CTIA disagree with the Commission’s decision, especially as they have not explained how the increased power levels they propose would affect LPI devices’ ability to use the band. And the Commission fully considered and declined to adopt CTIA’s proposal (supported by Verizon) to license a portion of the 6 GHz band. In its petition, CTIA simply recycles points that it has previously advanced, which the