On June 8, 2020, Iridium Communications, Aireon LLC, Flyht Aerospace Solutions and Skytrac Systems filed a reply to Ligado Networks’ Opposition to petitions for reconsideration or clarification filed by Iridium & co.
In the filing, they note:
LIGADO AND ITS ALLIES DO NOT EVEN ATTEMPT TO RESPOND TO SEVERAL IRIDIUM ARGUMENTS.
- The Order Ignored Material Evidence and Arguments. Iridium et al. showed that, contrary to the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), the Order ignored evidence and arguments that represented “important aspect[s] of the problem” before it.
- The Order is Constitutionally Deficient. Iridium et al. showed that, by interpreting the Communications Act to allow the FCC to override executive branch concerns regarding interference to military equipment, the Order unconstitutionally infringed on “the President’s role as Commander in Chief.”
- The Order’s Repair-and-Replace Condition is Infeasible, Toothless, and Unlawful. Iridium et al. demonstrated that the Order’s repair-and-replace condition with respect to federal users was infeasible, toothless, and unlawful under the Miscellaneous Receipts Act (MRA).
WHERE LIGADO AND ITS SURROGATES PURPORT TO RESPOND TO IRIDIUM’S CLAIMS, THEIR SUPERFICIAL ARGUMENTS FAIL.
- Repeated Invocation of “Agency Expertise” Does Not Override APA Requirements. Time and again, Ligado rests on the suggestion that criticisms of the Order are irrelevant because the FCC is an expert agency, and that petitioners’ arguments boil down to mere policy disagreements.
- FCC Failed to Satisfy Section 343 of the Act. Iridium et al. demonstrated that the Order violated Section 343’s requirement that the agency “resolve[]” concerns of harmful interference to covered GPS services in the 1525–1559 MHz and 1626.5–1660.5 MHz bands.
- FCC Failed to Satisfy Section 25.255 of Its Rules. Iridium et al. also showed that the Order was incompatible with Section 25.255 of the Commission’s rules. Ligado contends that this rule is irrelevant because Iridium’s authorization in the applicable band is “on a secondary basis” and thus, under Section 2.105(c), warrants no interference protection against Ligado’s “primary” use.
- Ligado is Not 5G. Roberson parrots the Order, contending that Ligado’s network will support elements of two of the three “cornerstones” of 5G – massive machine type communication and ultra-reliable and low latency communications. Roberson Opp. at 19. As Iridium et al. demonstrated, this is not so. Iridium et al. Petition at 19-20. Roberson fails to address the reasons why – namely, the facts that Ligado lacks sufficient bandwidth to support 5G, its offering is not covered by any of the 3GPP 5G standards, and there is no record evidence that Ligado has even initiated the process to be included in the 3GPP standards for 5G.
THE COMMISSION SHOULD CLARIFY THAT THE FIVE-YEAR EIRP RAMP- UP COMMENCED ON THE ORDER’S EFFECTIVE DATE.
- Ligado confirms Iridium et al.’s concern that it would adopt a tortured, self-serving reading of the Order’s statement that, “for a period of five years, the maximum EIRP” for 1627.5-1632.5 MHz “will ramp up from -31 dBW at 1627.5 MHz to -7 dBW at 1632.5 MHz.”