The following materials are provided to clarify the critically important information surrounding the FCC April 2020 “Ligado” L-band order and implications for U.S. 5G. Table of Contents TAB 1: Honorable Dan S. Goldin Letter to FCC Chairman/Commissioners, 4 September 2020 (2 pages) TAB 2: Letter to SASC Chairman Inhofe, 19 August 2020 (2 pages) TAB 3: Letter to Secretary of Defense Esper, 21 August 2020 (2 pages) TAB 4: L-Band (Ligado) Claims & Answers Document, compiled April - September 2020 (11 pages) • Detailed reference that factually repudiates the inaccurate claims against L-Band/FCC/Ligado TAB 5: C-Band + L-Band White Paper dated 18 May (updated August) 2020 (2 pages) A. C+L Innovation to Accelerate 5G Diagram (1 page) • Outlines the viability of “C+L” to greatly accelerate U.S. 5G deployment across America TAB 6: GPS Related FOIA Requests Summary & Status, 24 August 2020 (6 pages) • Highlights the lack of transparency and progress from DoD-NTIA on numerous key FOIAs TAB 7: Dan Goldin Op-Eds A. “Keep 5G Safe From Chinese Domination” (Wall Street Journal) (3 pages) B. “Recalculating: GPS, L-band and the Pentagon’s Untenable Position on 5G” (C4ISR) (3 pages) C. “A Wake Up Call on GPS” (Aviation Week) (1 Page) TAB 8: FCC Ligado Order (April 2020) Key Points Reference (1 page) Dear Chairman Pai & FCC Commissioners, 8 September 2020 I am writing about the brilliant and courageous L-Band (“Ligado”) decision you made in April 2020. Since November 2019, I have conducted extensive research, alongside a team of renowned experts in telecommunications and PNT/GPS, into the entire record of the Ligado proposal. Our team concluded precisely what your world-class spectrum experts independently concluded: The Ligado proposal will boost the development of U.S. 5G and IoT applications while, at the same time protecting GPS. The FCC’s 5-0 vote helps advance American technological leadership in the world in 5G related innovation like AI, PNT, robotics, quantum, autonomous vehicles, and more. These technologies will not only drive the industries of the future, but they will also generate massive, likely unprecedented economic growth. Yet at the urging of DoD, the SASC and HASC have attacked the FCC decision with damaging amendments to the upcoming National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) based on the entirely faulty premise of GPS interference. The HASC’s amendment from Rep. Michael Turner (R-OH) is the most egregious and must be removed above all else. In outrageous fashion it bans private companies from doing any business with DoD if they choose to develop 5G using the FCC-approved L-Band frequencies. The “Turner” amendment would essentially give DoD veto power over the FCC, severely undermine the FCC’s authority, discredit the FCC’s ability to lead internationally, and it would undercut private sector confidence in U.S. spectrum management—dissuading U.S. 5G innovation. I led NASA for ten years (1992-2001) under three Presidents. I oversaw the successful launch of the Space Shuttle 61 times and the redesign and construction of the International Space Station (ISS), with no loss of human life. During this period, I testified 60 times in Congress and have provided supporting information to more than 25 hearings from my various roles in the private sector. I have never seen an amendment like this Turner amendment—so blatant in its overreach and yet so disconnected from facts verified through testing that are readily available with a minimal amount of staff diligence. I have done all I can as a citizen for the past 10 months (with no compensation and no affiliation with Ligado) to highlight and advance this critical issue for America. I published four op-eds or articles, communicated in person and/or by phone with nearly all key stakeholders in the White House, NEC, OSTP, NSC, Commerce (including NTIA), State, DoD, with several members of the GPS/PNT community (members of the PNT EXCOM and/or PNT Advisory Board), and with over 100 Members of the House and Senate (including the leadership of the SASC, HASC, and House/Senate Commerce Committees). I cannot work on this issue indefinitely and need those “in the arena” to protect and implement the FCC order now. Further, I have never seen such an attack on an independent agency's fact-based decision as DoD has launched against the FCC, which has been carried forward errantly by the SASC and HASC. I am not the only one concerned about the level of influence the DoD seems to have in this case. An open letter to the SASC and HASC, published on 19 May and signed by over 30 organizations and experts, stated: “The federal government spent years consolidating its approach to spectrum policy to avoid the exact predicament in which the FCC’s decisions would be challenged by other federal agencies. This effort by federal agencies to undermine the authority vested in the FCC by Congress should be reversed, not encouraged.” The letter offers several compelling reasons DoD (and the Turner contracting amendment) must not succeed against the lawful, legitimate, scientifically-valid L-Band decision:1 • The FCC is “an independent agency directly controlled by Congress, that has acquired unparalleled engineering expertise in wireless technologies which has allowed the United States to dominate the global wireless economy for more than two decades.” • “Federal law (and more than two decades of federal practice) makes clear the process by which federal agencies work with the FCC to construct a uniform, coherent federal policy.” • “When those processes are not followed—as the Chair and Ranking Member of the House Energy & Commerce Committee recently observed—'the interests of the United States suffer and our international leadership on spectrum matters are compromised.’” • “The private sector must have certainty that the FCC has final say over spectrum issues so that innovation in wireless technologies can be seen as good investments that won’t be undone.” If the L-Band order is weakened it will give China a win in 5G and enormous economic, technological, military, and geopolitical advantages for decades. Beyond national security, millions of U.S. jobs and 1 Points from open letter to SASC and HASC 15 May 2020, signed Dr. Roslyn Layton and 30 organizations and tech policy experts. massive economic growth from 5G-led innovation will be delayed or lost. Yet at the urging of DoD, the SASC and HASC have attacked the FCC decision with damaging amendments to the upcoming National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) based on the entirely faulty premise of GPS interference. The HASC’s amendment from Rep. Michael Turner (R-OH) is the most egregious and must be removed above all else. In outrageous fashion it bans private companies from doing any business with DoD if they choose to develop 5G using the FCC-approved L-Band frequencies. The “Turner” amendment would essentially give DoD veto power over the FCC, severely undermine the FCC’s authority, discredit the FCC’s ability to lead internationally, and it would undercut private sector confidence in U.S. spectrum management— dissuading U.S. 5G innovation. There are numerous Members of Congress who agree strongly the Turner amendment must be removed, but many of them say they have received calls from very senior members of DoD reminding them that they have other important relationships with DoD in their home states that might be jeopardized if they support Ligado. Is this the same DoD I have worked with for the past 50 years? As you know, the next few years will determine whether the U.S. or China is the dominant 5G nation in the world. This particular 35-40MHz of L-Band spectrum—when combined with C-Band—will accelerate the deployment of full, nationwide U.S. 5G/IoT by 3-5 critical years or more, enabling integrated 5G across urban, suburban, and rural America by 2024. No other spectrum combination does this, period. All Americans should care about this. These conclusions were not only powerfully affirmed by the FCC’s rigorous 74-page order, but they were also confirmed more recently (June-July 2020) by the disclosure of multiple internal emails between DoD, the NTIA, and other parties. Even DoD spectrum experts know the FCC order is sound and will protect GPS (I detail some troubling indicators that DoD is suppressing dissent in the enclosed documents, see my letter to Secretary Esper). DoD just announced a plan to share 100MHz of mid-band spectrum (3.45GHz-3.55GHz) for deployment (ambitiously) in the second half of 2022. This 100MHz is a positive step, but it is not unencumbered spectrum, rather it must be shared with various DoD demands. Further, like all non-L-Band options, it requires construction of hundreds of thousands of new cell sites over five years or more for nationwide 5G. This much delayed deployment timeline—without L-Band—would give China an insurmountable 5G lead and dominance in 5G tech. Only L-Band (+ C-Band) allows U.S. 5G by 2024. L-Band is the game- changer in our race with China. Recent reports and analysis on L-Band from industry research heavyweights Newstreet, LightShed, Cowen, and MITRE affirm the critical importance of C+L. Please review the enclosed information: • Top claims against the FCC’s L-Band decision, including several made during the 6 May 2020 SASC hearing, followed by detailed information refuting each claim. I believe any opponent of Ligado who reads it once will come away with a starkly different perspective. • Recent letters to Senator Inhofe and Secretary of Defense Esper clearly outlining the facts and stakes. • A short white paper outlining the importance and viability of the “C+L” spectrum solution to U.S.