Lawmakers criticized federal agencies Thursday for the chaotic introduction of 5G wireless services earlier this year, accusing them of failing to report potential concerns for aviation safety.
Criticism came during a hearing of the House Aviation Subcommittee, where Steve Dixon, head of the Federal Aviation Administration, and representatives of the Airlines and Wireless Industries Trade Group testified to opposition, leading to delayed 5G deployment in January and several canceled fields.
The Chamber’s Transport and Infrastructure Committee convened the hearing due to ongoing collision with the participation of the FAA and the Federal Communications Commission, together with the aviation and wireless industry they regulate, for the deployment of 5G using the newly acquired C-band wireless spectrum.
The hearing was broadcast live on the website of the House Transport Committee.
Representative Peter DeFasio, an Oregon Democrat who chairs the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, criticized the FCC for approving the sale of the C-band to wireless operators last year, without seriously considering concerns from FAA officials tasked with regulate air travel safety in the United States.
“This is a model of ignoring the consequences beyond the consequences for the profitability of the telecommunications industry; that’s their only focus, “DeFazio told the FCC. Agency chairwoman Jessica Rosenworsel was invited to testify, but was not present, citing a conflict in the schedule.
“Having a missed call is much less serious than having a missed airline from the sky,” DeFazio added.
Representative Gareth Graves, a Louisiana Republican who is a member of the Aviation Subcommittee, accused the FAA and the FCC of “playing chicken with each other.” He called the interdepartmental opposition “inconvenient, ridiculous and unforgivable.” He said anything could have been avoided if the agencies had communicated better with each other from the start.
“We already have enough uncertainty about schedules and weather and other things we don’t need to create our own problems, further disrupting or creating uncertainty in air travel,” he said.
Who is to blame?
Although most of the public began hearing about fears of 5G disruption only late last year, when the FAA issued its first public warning, the controversy there are roots that give more than a decade. For years, the FAA and the aviation industry have been worried about whether 5G signals in the C-band could interfere with aircraft altimeters. Their fear is that any break in altimeters that pilots rely on during low-visibility landings to know how close they are to the ground could lead to a crash.
The FCC, which regulates the nation’s airtime, disagrees with the FAA and the aviation industry’s risk assessment. It says the evidence shows that there is no harmful interference between 5G using C-band and most of the altimeters used in aircraft. However, AT&T and Verizon have agreed to voluntary measures to allay possible concerns.
The clash between the two sides erupted on January 16th, just days earlier AT&T and Verizon were set to include their 5G services in the C-band. Despite two delays and voluntary agreements by wireless operators to change their deployment plans, the FAA began issuing warnings about 5G disruptions near airports, and airlines began canceling flights.
The FAA has dealt with the situation by issuing notices and directives to pilots of commercial airlines and requiring them to have alternative means of landing in low visibility situations. So far, the agency has allowed 90% of commercial aircraft flying in the United States to operate at airports where 5G C-Band transmitters are located.
The very public disagreement between federal agencies over the past two months has shed a bright light on the dysfunction that exists within the government’s process of redirecting valuable wireless spectrum to new services. At the hearing, lawmakers wanted to know why the FCC and FAA failed to coordinate over the years leading up to the introduction of 5G.
FAA administrator Steve Dixon, who testified first, acknowledged that the problem had to be addressed in a different way.
“I think everyone realizes that the process has not served anyone well,” he said. But he acknowledged that his agency was working with the wireless industry to solve the problems.
Dixon said the FAA had asked the FCC for more information for more than a year to assess the effect of 5G on its altimeters. But it wasn’t until the last few months, after the FAA got directly involved with wireless operators, that it was able to obtain the necessary information, such as certain locations on 5G towers and transmission power levels.
“As it turns out, the FCC didn’t even have the data we needed,” Dixon said. “We discovered this when we started working directly with telecommunications companies. They never had to give that to the government.”
Dixon said the FAA is working to develop new standards that will require airlines to upgrade or replace older aircraft instruments that are disrupted by 5G signals.
Continuing problem
Although the FAA says it is working for a permanent solution, lawmakers and airline officials who witnessed the hearing noted that the situation is still problematic. The temporary restrictions agreed by the wireless operators will expire in six months and the current practice of issuing warnings and requiring alternative landing models for certain situations is unsustainable in the long term, especially as operators continue to include more 5G services in the whole country.
As a result, airline flight crews have been forced to stay out of new FAA restrictions, which vary depending on different runways, even at the same airport, requiring pilots to make extensive detours.
“This is not a way to run a railroad,” said Joe DePitt, president of the Airline Pilots Association. “And there is certainly no way to manage the world’s safest air transport system.”
Lawmakers and the aviation industry have called on regulators to come up with a permanent solution that would allow 5G service without sacrificing passenger safety.
“The truth of the matter is that both our industries have been plunged into this economic disaster that can be avoided by a failed government process,” said Nicholas Calio, president of the Airlines for America trade group, in his testimony at the time. at the hearing.
Faye Malarkey Black, head of the Regional Airlines Association, complained that smaller regional airlines had not received as many FAA permits, putting them at greater risk of canceling flights in bad weather.
“Leaving dozens of airports and millions of passengers vulnerable to major disruptions is unsustainable and unacceptable,” she said.
Failure in communication
The consensus among lawmakers and all those who testified was that there was a breakdown in communication between federal agencies.
But where or how this damage occurred is still unclear. While some lawmakers have blamed the FCC and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, which represents the president on spectrum, for ignoring the FAA, Meredith Atwell Baker, chief executive of the CTIA Wireless Trade Group and former FCC commissioner and NTIA official said the agencies had worked very well together in the past “on really hairy spectrum issues” to free up commercial and federal spectrum. She said that in her experience, the interdepartmental process has always been able to work out “many, really complex deals”.
“It was auction number 107,” she said. “And I’ve never seen anything like it before. So I’d say it’s an anomaly.”
She said that this situation illustrates that “we need to get the information from the agency early and let the spectrum engineers do their job, because this is an engineering problem.”