Global race for 5G heats up with latest US Congress bill

Spectrum freed up in law named after telco veteran


Analysis A global race to roll out next-generation 5G mobile networks has intensified with the approval of new legislation by the US House of Representatives.

The peculiarly titled Repack Airwaves Yielding Better Access for Users of Modern Services Act [PDF] – designed to spell out the name of a staff director of a key Congressional committee, Ray Baum, who died last month – includes a wide range of measures but most critically sets the stage for 5G networks in the US.

Key among them are the Spectrum Deposits Act and the Mobile Now Act, both designed to streamline the auction and use of airwaves to send and receive 5G signals. The first gets around the restriction on banks to accept upfront payments, and the second allows the federal government to both identify future spectrum for 5G use as well as speed up the installation of 5G equipment on federal property.

In addition, it creates a new Broadcast Repack Fund by which the current users of spectrum that mobile companies want for 5G will be reimbursed for the cost of moving to a different wavelength.

All these measures – and a few others included in the bill – are designed to help overcome obstacles to the real-world installation and use of 5G networks: a technology that is expected to usher in a new era of hyper-connectivity.

Fifth-generation wireless technology has the potential to send billions of bits of data per second – 100 times faster than the current best 4G LTE technology. In addition, 5G is being designed to work with a range of new devices, from connected cars to internet-of-things items.

Hold your horses

There is a big problem though: 5G needs new spectrum and lots more base stations. There is a finite amount of usable wireless spectrum and most of it is already being used. So not only will companies have to be moved off their current spectrum but it will have to be decided who gets to use what slices of spectrum in order to make 5G networks work properly.

In addition, there will need to be a vast amount of additional equipment installed. Current mobile technology, on average, requires base stations every 1-2 miles apart; that will have to be reduced to every 500m for 5G (more for dense areas; less for rural areas).

It's impossible for mobile phone companies to buy millions of very small amounts of land to host antenna so they rent space on other people's land and by far the most common solution is to pay local government for the use of already existing streetlights and power poles.

It all comes down to money, of course. Companies using the spectra that 5G operators want aren't keen on moving but they will do so for a fee. Likewise, local government has legitimate concerns about placing base stations all over the place but at the same time can hear the tills ringing.

Prices vary widely across the United States but the average cost of installing equipment on a pole is around $2,000 per year. AT&T recently complained that it had received an estimate of $8,000 a year from a city in California. Even in low-cost Georgia, the local government felt it could get away with asking for $6,000 per pole per year.

There are roughly 350,000 base stations in the US and that number would likely have to quadruple (again, these are all rough figures) for 5G. So the annual cost of simply hosting 5G equipment is in the billions of dollars.

Unsurprisingly, the mobile industry is complaining vociferously about the cost of rollout and has been targeting lawmakers and federal regulators to help bring it down. And in many cases, they have been obliging. In Texas, for example, the state passed a law that restricted the charge to $250 per year.

Reductions of that magnitude could save mobile companies billions of dollars a year, which the industry says will enable the installation of 5G technology at a far faster rate.

Special interests

That's not all that's happening. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is going all out to make 5G rollout as easy as possible, although its approach has led many to worry that it is acting more in the interests of the mobile companies than consumers.

One high-profile example has been the stacking of a key advisory committee, the Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee (BDAC), with mobile phone company reps and purposefully restricting the impact of local government officials.

FCC chair Ajit Pai clearly takes the mobile phone industry's view that local governments are getting in the way of 5G rollout – and, without explicitly saying it, milking the situation for all it is worth.

But the BDAC's recent recommendations have been criticized as simply ignoring the genuine concerns of local government officials, running roughshod over efforts to set up local networks, and in some cases breaking the law.

Another FCC Commissioner, Brendan Carr, recently proposed [PDF] excluding "small wireless facilities" i.e. 5G stations from "the environmental and historic review procedures that were designed for large, macrocell deployments."

Carr argued that the reviews weren't needed and removing them would "reduce the regulatory costs of small cell deployment by 80 per cent, cut deployment timelines in half, and expand 5G deployments."

That's a plausible argument but it ignores the fact that there are good reasons why such reviews are there in the first place and giving mobile phone companies a free hand to install equipment is a huge risk in itself.

Rules for ourselves

One thing the federal government can do with little blowback is set rules for federal facilities. And it has already done so, with President Trump signing an executive order designed to make it easier and faster for 5G stations to be installed on federal property.

Some of it is pure red-tape cutting: such as mandating that a single, universal application is created for mobile companies to apply to install their equipment; and requiring federal authorities to respond within a specific timeframe and give a clear reason for denying an application.

Those aspects have also been pulled into the Ray Baums Act that was passed by the House on Wednesday ("not later than 270 days after the date on which an executive agency receives a duly filed application for an easement, right-of-way, or lease under this subsection, the executive agency shall (i) grant or deny, on behalf of the Federal Government, the application; and (ii) notify the applicant of the grant or denial").

But while the federal government owns a lot of land, it doesn't have anywhere near the coverage that 5G needs, and so local government property is going to be critical to its rollout.

The inherent tension and frustration even led to the White House internally proposing that it effectively nationalize the mobile network and lease it out to companies: something that caused pretty much everyone to freak out.

Bigger picture

Why the concerted drive for 5G, to the point where the federal government is passing laws and picking fights?

Aside from the enormous potential economic benefit of nationwide 5G networks, and the massive profits that mobile phone companies can expect to realize, the bigger picture is that the 5G final standard itself is still under construction.

A number of companies – from China's Huawei to Sweden's Ericsson to South Korea's Samsung to Finland's Nokia to US's own Qualcomm – are all desperately trying to influence the standard before it gets locked down, with potentially enormous future benefits.

That is why the US government is unhappy about Singapore-based Broadcom's proposed $117 billion takeover of Qualcomm – it fears the acquisition could result in America losing its inside edge on the future of telecoms.

Those concerns even prompted Broadcom to promise it would earmark $1.5bn to "train and educate the next generation of engineers in the US 5G networks" if authorities allowed the buyout to go forward.

Aside from direct influence on standards, the biggest way of defining 5G globally is to be in the position of actually buying and installing equipment. And that can't happen if there are so many roadblocks that countries like China have fully fledged 5G in place while the US still argues about environmental impact studies.

The bill passed on Wednesday by the House of Representatives is just one stepping stone on that path to ensure that the US gets to play a role in the next generation of telecommunications while also trying to ensure that the US doesn't repeat the CDMA/GSM standard-split where the US went one direction and the rest of the world went another. ®

Similar topics

Broader topics


Other stories you might like

  • SpaceX: 5G expansion could kill US Starlink broadband
    It would be easier to take this complaint seriously if Elon wasn't so Elon

    If the proposed addition of the 12GHz spectrum to 5G goes forward, Starlink broadband terminals across America could be crippled, or so SpaceX has complained. 

    The Elon Musk biz made the claim [PDF] this week in a filing to the FCC, which is considering allowing Dish to operate a 5G service in the 12GHz band (12.2-12.7GHz). This frequency range is also used by Starlink and others to provide over-the-air satellite internet connectivity.

    SpaceX said its own in-house study, conducted in Las Vegas, showed "harmful interference from terrestrial mobile service to SpaceX's Starlink terminals … more than 77 percent of the time, resulting in full outages 74 percent of the time." It also claimed the interference will extend to a minimum of 13 miles from base stations. In other words, if Dish gets to use these frequencies in the US, it'll render nearby Starlink terminals useless through wireless interference, it was claimed.

    Continue reading
  • FCC: Applications for funds to replace Chinese comms kit lack evidence
    Well you told us to rip and ... hang on, we're not getting any money?

    The saga of the US government's plan to rip and replace China-made communications kit from the country's networks has a new twist: following reports that applications for funding far outstripped the cash set aside, it appears two-thirds of such applications lack adequate cost estimates or sufficient supporting evidence.

    The US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) informed Congress that it had found deficiencies in 122 of the 181 of the applications filed with it by US carriers for funding to reimburse them for replacing telecoms equipment sourced from Chinese companies.

    The FCC voted nearly a year ago to reimburse medium and small carriers in the US for removing and replacing all network equipment provided by companies such as Huawei and ZTE. The telecoms operators were required to do this in the interests of national security under the terms of the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act.

    Continue reading
  • 5G C-band rollout at US airports slowed over radio altimeter safety fears
    Well, they did say from July, now they really mean from July 2023

    America's aviation watchdog has said the rollout of 5G C-band coverage near US airports won't fully start until next year, delaying some travelers' access to better cellular broadband at crowded terminals.

    Acting FAA Administrator Billy Nolen said in a statement this month that its discussions with wireless carriers "have identified a path that will continue to enable aviation and 5G C-band wireless to safely co-exist."

    5G C-band operates between 3.7-3.98GHz, near the 4.2-4.4GHz band used by radio altimeters that are jolly useful for landing planes in limited visibility. There is or was a fear that these cellular signals, such as from cell towers close to airports, could bleed into the frequencies used by aircraft and cause radio altimeters to display an incorrect reading. C-band technology, which promises faster mobile broadband, was supposed to roll out nationwide on Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile US's networks, but some deployments have been paused near airports due to these concerns. 

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022