Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Spectrum Strategic Planning
DoD Spectrum Workshop 2011
“Spectrum Support to Our Military Forces – The
Challenge Ahead”
2
Disclaimer
• The views expressed in this briefing are personal views and do not represent official Air Force position
• I fully support the President’s direction for the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) to work with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and federal agencies …• To identify 500 MHz of federal and non-federal spectrum
for wireless broadband within 10 years,• While protecting critical current and future capabilities
• I do not claim to have all the answers and aim to elicit thought and open discussion
3
Fundamental Spectrum Principles
• Finite natural resource; cannot be
Banked Expanded Concentrated
• National asset• Enables diverse government, commercial, consumer
services and capabilities• Optimize use to deliver the maximum national benefit
UHF300 – 3000
MHz
HF & Below0 - 30 MHz
VHF30 – 300
MHz
UHF300 – 3000
MHz
SHF3 – 30 GHz
EHF300 – 300
GHz
UHF300 – 3000
MHz
SHF3 – 30 GHz
VHF30 – 300
MHz
UHF/SHFAddition
VHF/UHFAddition
600
MHz-Years
US StrategicSpectrum Reserve
4
Current Process – Shortfalls
• No short or long range forecasting/guidance• Risk – expensive modifications over life of system• New systems in development for candidate bands
• No method to balance diverse requirements• Consumer services, defense, medical, etc.• Maximum benefit to nation not assured
• Limited incentive(s) to improve use• New/best technologies not always implemented quickly • Lacks holistic approach required to produce benefits
• Limited comparable spectrum availability• Linchpin issue already; only gets tougher from here• Could degrade into spectrum “musical chairs”
5
Inputs to Strategic Spectrum Planning
• Requirements – both current and predicted future• Current allocations/use (US & international)• Current regulatory environment• Current state of technology
• Current and projected gaps (unmet requirements)
6
Points to Ponder
• Balancing competition against duplication• How many ways to receive same television program?
• Definition of requirements• Does possible equate to required?
• Definition/measure of utility• What is a common scale to measure diverse functions?
• Increasing utility from a finite resource• What truly enables increased utility?
• Importance of international harmonization• What are the risks and rewards of going it alone?
• The future is full of unknowns• How to plan for unknown developments?
7
Strategic Spectrum Plan Key Components
• Technology Plan• Identifies, prioritizes, and organizes research and
development of promising spectrum technologies• Deployment of new technologies can increase utility
• Regulatory Policy Plan• Identifies, prioritizes and organizes
development/revision of regulatory policy to enhance spectrum utility (including deployment of new technologies)
• Allocation/Use Plans• Short–, Mid– and Long–Term (Next Slide)• Supported by Regulatory Policy & Technology Plans• Provides clear guidance to system owners /
developers; both near–term and long–term
8
Strategic Spectrum Plan Key Components Allocation/Use Plans
• Near–Term (1 – 5 Years)• Very specific bands, dates, exclusions, conditions/rules• Relocations in progress• Auctions conducted• Supported by Regulatory Policy Plan
• Mid–Term (6 – 15 Years)• Studies conducted, technologies refined/tested/finalized• New uses identified, bands refined/finalized• Relocation/termination/sharing plans developed• Supported Technology Plan; Drives Regulatory Plan
• Long–Term (16 – 30+ Years)• Broad concepts, general bands
• Reduced fixed service below 6 GHz by 50% in 20 yrs, 90% 30 yrs• Drives Technology Plan
9
Plan Component Relationships
Long Term Allocation
PlanTechnology
Plan
Regulatory Plan
Mid Term Allocation
Plan
Near Term Allocation
Plan
Unmet Requirements
Tim
e P
rog
ress
ion
10
US National
Spectrum PlanUS
Non-Federal
Spectrum Plan
US Federal
Spectrum Plan US
Federal Spectrum
Plan
US Federal
Spectrum Plan
US Federal
Spectrum Plan
US Federal
Spectrum Plan
US Federal
Spectrum Plan
US Air Force Spectrum
Plan
US on-Federal Spectrum
Plan
US on-Federal Spectrum
Plan
US on-Federal Spectrum
Plan
US on-Federal Spectrum
Plan
US Non-Federal
Spectrum Plan
US BroadcastSpectrum
Plan
One Spectrum
Plans Must Integrate
Vertically & Horizontally
Holistic Approach
11
Relationship to International Agenda
US National
Spectrum Plan
Position on WRC Agenda Items
Proposals for Future
WRC Agenda Items
WRCDecisions
12
Challenges – It Isn’t Easy
• Resources – to do it right• People (talented), money, time
• Balancing competing interests• Finding Apples-to-Oranges comparison
• Requires Long-Term View• Does not mesh well with short term horizons
• Factors we influence, but do not control• International (WRC, ICAO, etc.), Legislative
• Unknowns – Particularly Long Term• Technological/societal developments• Natural or manmade events
• Transitioning to a long term process
13
Summary & Recommendations
• Maximizing national benefit requires long term approach to spectrum management
• Present system lacks long term view essential to maximizing benefits
Optimum approach is not easy;Present approach is neither easy nor optimum
