r fi I R C it t Paul D. Bush" * * ^ " • * " ® Senior Vice President, Corporale & Business Development

October 8, 2014

Senior DirectorSpectrum Development and OperationsIndustry Canada300 Slater St. (JETN 15lh)Ottawa ONK1A0H5

Via e-mail: spectrum.operations@ic.gc.ca

Dear Sir:

Re: Canada Gazette, Part 1, September 6, 2014, Notice No. DGSO-003-14 —Consultation on Policy Changes in the 3500 MHz Band (3475-3650 MHz) and a NewLicensing Process in Rural Areas

Introduction

Telesat Canada is pleased to provide the following comments (the "Comments") inresponse to Notice No. DGSO-003-14 — Consultation on Policy Changes in the 3500MHz Band (3475-3650 MHz) and a New Licensing Process in Rural Areas ("theConsultation").Telesat, which is headquartered in Canada, is the fourth largest fixed-satellite operator in the world.

Within Canada, Telesat satellite capacity is used for the provision of national security andsafety-of-life services, broadband services in rural and remote areas, and infrastructurecritical to Canadian broadcasters and broadcast distribution undertakings. The 3500 MHzband is adjacent to the 3700-4200 MHz band (referred to as C-band in the satelliteindustry) and is widely used for critical services throughout Canada, and in fact aroundthe world.

Telesat1 s Comments primarily address Question 7 of the Consultation, which invitescomment on the proposal to reallocate the 3475-3650 MHz band to include mobileservices and to make consequential changes to the Canadian Table of FrequencyAllocations. A reallocation of these frequencies has the potential to seriously disrupt theprovisioning of services to Canadians in rural and remote communities across the countryand will, if enacted, negatively impact both the safety and economic well being ofcitizens.

1601 Telesat Court, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1B 5P4Tel:+1-613-748-8786 Fax:+1-613-748-8780 Email: pbush@telesat.com

For the reasons outlined in these Comments, Telesat strongly urges the Department, priorto changing the 3500 MHz band allocations in the Canadian Table of FrequencyAllocations, to:

• Carefully consider the use of existing allocated mobile spectrum and thejustification for additional spectrum in each Tier 4 service area that it proposes toclassify as Urban;

• Propose the technical details that would apply to use by the mobile service of the3500 MHz band, in particular specifying out-of-band emission limits that wouldapply; and

• Launch a public consultation to seek comment by interested parties on both thespectrum need and the technical framework.

Telesat urges the Department to consider the serious threat that this reallocation ofspectrum poses and suggests that further detailed analysis is needed before any decisioncan be reached.

Inconsistency with Framework Documents

Telesat notes that the Policy Objectives section of the Consultation contains a referenceto the Economic Action Plan 2014 ("the Action Plan") and the commitment of theGovernment "to extend and enhance broadband Internet services in rural and northerncommunities in order to meet the continued demand for fixed services in rural areas"(emphasis added). In fact, the Action Plan is not specific as to technology, but ratherspeaks only of a proposal to "extend and enhance broadband service" in rural andNorthern communities. Telesat has long been a supporter of this goal and has madesignificant investments to include all-of-Canada C-band capacity within its fleet of Aniksatellites, specifically designed to enable northern and remote services. Telesat has,moreover, provided public benefit space segment capacity to broadband service providersat no charge and has invested its own funds to help expand the necessary earth stationinfrastructure. C-band remains the most ubiquitous and reliable means of providingaccess to telephony and broadband services into communities mat have no other means ofcommunications, and the infrastructure and facilities that have been put in place overmany years enable access to critical services. Appendix 1 outlines a number of criticalservices provided at C-band frequencies within Telesat's fleet.

The Department's 2007 Spectrum Policy Framework* adopts Enabling Guidelines for theachievement of spectrum policy goals. Two of these;

"...spectrum should be made available for a range of services that are in the publicinterest";and"Spectrum should be made available to support Canadian sovereignty, securityand public safety needs"

http://www.ic.gc.c;i/eic/siie/srnt-gst.nsf/eng/sfO8776.hinil at 4.4

are particularly relevant to the proposed changes in the 3500 MHz band, in view of thepotential disruption of long-standing services in the adjoining 3700-4200 MHz band thatsupport Canadian sovereignty, security and public safety. Based on this, it is critical toensure that regulatory changes do not risk interrupting existing services; and certainly notwithout careful assessment of need, detailed technical evaluation, and a well-developedplan to mitigate harmful effects.

The Consultation, at paragraph 17, refers to the Department's March 2013 CommercialMobile Spectrum Outlook2, (the "Outlook") noting that the Outlook had identified the3500 MHz band as one of the potential bands to be used for commercial mobilespectrum. The Outlook does contain the statement:

"Once an international equipment ecosystem becomes evident, it is expected thatfrom 100 to 175 MHz of spectrum could be repurposed for mobile broadbanddeployments without affecting the C-Band spectrum, used to provide FSSservices."

Yet the Consultation ignores significant caveats contained in the Outlook, which arereproduced below:

"The 3700-3800 MHz band is allocated to both the fixed service and the fixed-satellite service (FSS). The fixed use is for point-to-point links that providewireless terrestrial backhaul and other two-way data applications. The 3700-3800 MHz band is heavily used by the FSS for the delivery of broadband servicesas well as feeder links for television broadcasts. It forms part of the larger pairingof 3700-4200 MHz (used for downlink) and 5925-6425 MHz (used for uplink),commonly referred to as the C-Band. The licences held by the top five users ofthe C-Band account for 65.9 percent of all frequency assignments (approximately2,350) in this band. Additionally, there are three Canadian and 53 foreignsatellites licensed to operate in the C-Band. Industry Canada currently requiresthat operators provide public benefit satellite capacity in the C-Band as part oftheir conditions of licence. A large number of remote northern communitiesdepend on this satellite capacity in order to meet their communications needs."

"FSS receiver earth stations operate above 3700 MHz for weather monitoring,national defence and security, TV distribution to TV broadcast stations and cablesystems and services in the North. They are susceptible to interference fromtransmitters operating below 3700 MHz. Therefore, a minimum separationdistance is required between any WBS base station or FWA station and the FSSreceiver earth stations. Furthermore, in order to protect terrestrial services(including the fixed and mobile services), FSS satellite transmitters operating inthe 3700-4200 MHz band are subject to some power flux density limits, specifiedin Article 21 of the International Radio ReeulationsP1****^ Sharing betweenmobile base stations or subscriber terminals and FSS earth stations would bevery difficult" (emphasis added)

2 litlp://www.ic.ec.ca/eic/siie/smt-est.nsf/eng/sfO9446.l]iml at 4.2

As will be discussed in these comments, the situation remains the same today. It is neverexplained how an "international equipment ecosystem" for mobile services can somehowremove the threat, acknowledged by the Department, to a significant element of Canada'scommunications infrastructure.

In the Consultation, the Department notes that the Consultation on Renewal Process for2300 MHz and 3500 MHz Licences indicated a strong demand for mobile broadbandservices in urban areas and that data-intensive mobile applications increase the demandfor spectrum. Telesat does not dispute that there is significant growth in mobile dataservices, but notes that the very liberal definition proposed in the Consultation for "urbanareas", as evidenced by the list in Annex A, results in the classification of hugegeographic areas as "urban". Telesat urges the Department to carefully scrutinize boththe supply of, and demand for, spectrum in each Tier 4 service area in which it proposesto allocate the 3500 MHz spectrum for mobile services. In this regard, the results ofseveral studies on mobile spectrum demand, undertaken in the context of WRC-I5Agenda Item 1.1, are instructive.

• A study conducted by LS Telecom3 showed that on a worldwide basis, almost onequarter of the spectrum already licensed for IMT (mobile) use is not being used.

• A recent paper by Mehta and Musey4 presents "evidence of persistent errors inprojections of wireless demand" and makes this important conclusion:

"Our findings suggest the mobile industry contains much higher levels ofinherent demand uncertainty than is commonly estimated and thatbusiness and governments may not be fully factoring it into their policydecisions. To reduce dependence on uncertain estimates, governmentofficials should consider assigning spectrum allocations with greaterflexibility of use. Additionally, we recommend that policymakers usedemand projections only when they are transparent, have authorialaccountability, and comply with processes to reduce conflicts of interest."

• A study published in the EBU Technical Review5 makes the following points:

"It is therefore very important, before taking any decision on newspectrum allocations to mobile services, to ensure that:

1. the mobile spectrum requirements are realistic, taking into account thetechnical and economic viability of the foreseen market developments inthe time frame under consideration (e.g. until 2020), and

^ A copy of the report may be downloaded at http://gvf.org/index.php/news/news.htmlMehta, Aalok and Musey, J. Armand, Overestimating Wireless Demand: Policy and Investment

Implications of Upward Bias in Mobile Data Forecasts (August 15, 2014). Available at SSRN:li[tp://ssrn.coin/ahslracl=24183645 https://tech.ebu.ch/docs/techreview/trev_2014~Q l_Mobile-Spectrum.pdf

2. it can be reliably assumed that the incremental benefits for society ofproviding new spectrum for mobile use will exceed the costs andinconvenience of displacing the existing users."

and decries the absence of such analysis at either the European or global level.

C-band Provides Critical Elements of Canadian Telecom Infrastructure

In 2006, in response to an earlier consultation6, the Canadian Satellite and Space IndustryForum expressed concerns7 (the "2006 CSSIF Comments") about the impact of out-of-band ("OOB") emissions on sensitive satellite services. Appendix 2 to the CSSIFComments provided some examples of selected C-band earth station facilities in Canadathat were located in urban areas. These earth stations are major teleports that connectremote communities to the internet, government networks, military control centres, etc.While some details have changed in the intervening eight years, most of these servicescontinue to be provided. Many have expanded in capacity and additional links have beenestablished. Furthermore, the Department's proposed liberal definition of "urban areas"puts additional C-band earth stations (e.g. in North Bay) at risk. Appendix 2 provides asampling of some of the "urban" teleports that this change would put at risk. It does notinclude all of the other critical infrastructure owned by all of the other satellite users inCanada.

Qut-of-band Emissions

Section 9 of the 2006 CSSIF Comments provides a technical analysis of the impact ofOOB emissions from Wireless Broadband Service (WBS) transmitters on sensitivesatellite receivers. Two effects are discussed: overload of the earth station front-endamplifier; and unacceptable increase in noise (AT/T) at the FSS receiver due to out-of-band interference.

It is not possible in this proceeding to perform a similar technical analysis, since thetechnical characteristics of the proposed 3500 MHz mobile service are not known. Asnoted in the Consultation, should the reallocation occur, the Department proposes8 toinitiate a further consultation at a later date on a 3500 MHz technical framework.Nevertheless, both overload and OOB interference effects are of serious concern toTelesat, its customers, and end users of C-band service.

Iuin://www.ic.ec.ca/(iic/.siie/smt-gsi.nsf/ene/sro8675.html Canada CJazette No. DGTP-006-06 dated June23, 2006; Proposed Spectrum Utilization Policy, Technical and Licensing Requirements for WirelessBroadband Services (WBS) in the Band 3650-3700 MHz1 lutps://www.ic.gc.cti/eic/sile/s mi-gst.nsf/vwapi/detn-QQ6-06-cssif.ndf/$FILE/d etn-006-06-cssif.pdf8 Consultation at 53.

In this regard, it is instructive to consider the record of a similar proceeding9 before theFCC in the United States. In that proceeding, the Satellite Industry Association (SIA)notes10 that:

"All parties that have submitted technical studies have shown a need to protectadjacent band FSS earth stations... the dominant adjacent band interferenceproblem is the out-of-band emissions (OOBE) of the .. .transmitters- i.e. theunwanted energy that is emitted by such transmitters outside of their assignedband and in the band in which an FSS receiver is operating. Receive filters on theFSS earth station antenna cannot help with this mode of interference because suchfilters are designed to reject only energy outside of the wanted FSS receive band."

With its comments, the SIA filed a technical analysis prepared by engineering firm, RKFEngineering Solutions, LLC ("RKF1). RKF analyzed the separation distances that wouldbe required to protect earth stations operating in C-band adjacent to the 3500 MHz bandas a function of the OOB limits imposed on the mobile service transmitters and of earthstation off-axis angle. RKF concluded that "significant separation distances will beneeded to control aggregate interference..." Even with the most stringent OOB limit (-50dBrn/MHz) suggested by the FCC, RKF concluded that "separation distances.. .arebetween 100 m and 1 km, depending on the FSS earth station off-axis angle."

Another comprehensive technical study of sharing between IMT mobile services and C-band earth stations was conducted by Alion Science and Technology in 2013 andsubsequently presented to the ITU JTG 4/5/6/7 by the North American BroadcastersAssociation '. Considering out-of-band interference, the authors conclude:

"For the adjacent band case, the deployment of IMT-A systems will createunacceptable restrictions to avoid RF interference or large-signal interactions withC-band earth stations for macro cell base station scenarios. For the small cellscenario, the size of the exclusion zones was smaller due to the fact that they havebeen specified to be installed lower to the ground and limited in transmit power.However, the required protection distances would still prevent small cell urbandeployments over a protection area centered around a C-band earth stationreceiver ranging from 2.5 to over 45 sq km - a result which makes sharing notfeasible."

The technical result is clear: OOB emissions from mobile service transmitters in the 3500MHz band will interfere with earth stations operating in the adjacent 3700-4200 MHzband, unless adequate separation distances are maintained at all times.

Mobile Use of 3500 MHz Poses Greater Risk than WBS Use

See GN Docket No. 12-354 Amendment of the Commission's Rules with Regard to CommercialOperations in the 3550-3650 MHz Band1(1 Comments of the Satellite Industry Association filed July 14. 2014.1' See hUp://www.nabaiietxom/nabaweb/itu/submissions/R12-JTG4567-C-0274.pdf

Notwithstanding the 2006 CSSIF Comments, WBS has been implemented in Canada inthe 3500 MHz and 3650-3700 MHz bands. One might therefore ask why seriousinterference issues have not arisen. The answer lies in the way that broadband servicesand C-band satellite earth stations have been deployed in Canada. Broadband services indensely populated urban areas are mostly provided by fibre optics or other wired means.As noted above, broadband services are also provided extensively via satellite in sparselypopulated areas. DTH satellite and FWA are a cost effective way to provision services inbetween these extremes, e.g. in suburban fringes, and in rural areas that have sufficientpopulation density to permit the service provider to recoup the necessary investment inwireless infrastructure. On the other hand, C-band earth stations tend to be located eitherin areas of very low population density (e.g. small communities in the North) or in urbanareas, where they provide broadcast applications and where teleports act as gateways intothe telecommunications backbone for services that are being provided to areas of lowpopulation density. In short, FWA transmitters and C-band earth station receivers inCanada tend to be geographically separated and interference has not become a seriousissue.

The risks posed by the proposed reallocation to include mobile services are much greater.First, the mobile services would be allocated in precisely the urban areas where C-bandearth stations provide critical services today. Second, mobile transmitter locations varyover time and therefore aggregate interference levels will fluctuate. How will aggregateinterference be calculated, and how will it be controlled? In the FCC proceeding,elaborate software is envisaged to track real-time mobile use in the geographic areasurrounding each C-band earth station. As envisaged, the software would inhibit mobileuse so as to keep aggregate interference levels below a pre-determined limit. Puttingaside the sheer volume of constantly changing data (and moreover from competingproviders) that would have to be tracked, developing software that could make aggregateinterference calculations for each earth-station at millisecond intervals and then inhibitsome mobile transmitters to reduce the aggregate interference (again within milliseconds)would be extremely challenging, if not impossible.

In summary, the mobile industry should be required to demonstrate the feasibility of (notjust conceptualize) any such software before the Department changes the allocation in the3500 MHz band. Mobile transmitters will be ubiquitous, consumer products. If theDepartment does not establish appropriate means to protect C-band earth stations prior tomobile transmitter deployment, remedial action would be extremely difficult, if notimpossible, once devices reach the consumer market.

Conclusion

C-band satellite links provide critical telecommunications services to Canadians. Theseinclude: military communications (e.g. that relay advanced radar and surveillance datafrom geographic areas not accessible any other way); safety-of-life (e.g. civil aircraftcommunications and emergency response communications); vital telephony andbroadband links to remote communities unserved by any other means; and distributionand collection of signals essential to the Canadian broadcast infrastructure. Many of the

earth stations that provide these services are located in the same urban areas where theDepartment proposes to permit mobile use in the adjoining 3500 MHz band. These earthstations are susceptible to service-affecting interference due to front-end overload and/orout-of-band interference.

As noted above, prior to changing the 3500 MHz band allocations in the Canadian Tableof Frequency Allocations^ the Department is urged to:

• Carefully consider the use of existing allocated mobile spectrum and thejustification for additional spectrum in each Tier 4 service area that it proposes toclassify as Urban;

• Propose the technical details that would apply to use by the mobile service of the3500 MHz band, in particular specifying out-of-band emission limits that wouldapply; and

• Launch a public consultation to seek comment by interested parties on both thespectrum need and the technical framework.

Telesat welcomes an opportunity to reinforce the importance of the C-band servicesprovided in Canada and is more than willing to elaborate on any of the issues raised inthis submission. We urge the Department to consider the serious threat that thisreallocation of spectrum poses and suggest that a detailed technical analysis is neededbefore any decision can be reached.

Sincerely,

^-PatrTBush

Appendix 1

Sample of Critical Services Provided on Telesat Anik FIR, F2 and F3 C-bandSatellites

• CBC/Radio Canada uses multiple C-band transponders to distribute 15 Englishtelevision channels and 10 French television channels across the country. Thesignals are received in urban areas at the retransmission site for over-the-airservice or for distribution by cable companies. CBC/Radio-Canada also uses C-band for contribution feeds from six Northern sites (Goose Bay, Inuvik, Iqaluit,Whitehorse, Yellowknife and Rankin Inlet). These signals are received by theregional office or by the national office to be included in a regional distributionprogram. C-band is also used to provide data interconnection from the sixnorthern communities to the CBC network. More than 40 radio services are alsodistributed across the country on a C-band transponder. In all, more than 1000receive C-band earth stations are owned and operated by the CBC.

• CTV (Bell Media) uses C-band transponders to distribute CTV's regional feeds.Uplinks from Toronto and Calgary are used to distribute television programmingto 28 affiliate sites located in urban areas. CTV's broadcasting signals carry awide range of news, sports, information and entertainment programming.

• Shaw Broadcast Services operates a broadcast service to thousands of Canadiancable heads ends under a SRDU (Satellite Relay Distribution Undertaking),licensed by the CRTC. Shaw uses C-band transponder to deliver over 20 videosignals to more than 1500 small cable head ends across Canada.

• Specialty Television Broadcasters, such as Musique Plus, Musimax, RDS, TNI,ASN, Tele-Quebec, The Weather Network, Meteo Media, Disney Playhouse,Disney XD, RDI, ArTV, TV5 and Unis use C-band transponders for thecollection and distribution of programming . Earth station locations are in urbancentres of major cities across Canada.

• Department of National Defence (DND) uses C-band capacity for mobiledeployments across Canada. This service consists of two-way links betweentransportable terminals and the Ottawa hub station located at a government officecomplex location in central Ottawa.

• Telus uses C-band capacity to provide telephony and data services to remotecommunities in Western Canada.

• Galaxy Broadband uses C-band trunking to link its wireless sites in rural andremote areas with the communications backbone.

• The natural resource industry relies on C-band to provide data links to minesand oil and gas installations. These links typically terminate at teleports in urbanlocations operated by resellers of Telesat space segment.

A DND C-band service provides sensitive data links between a militaryinstallation in Nunavut and an earth station located adjacent to a high traffic arteryin Ottawa. DND also operates the North Warning System, which provides datafrom radar installations across the North. All the North Warning remote siteshome into the hub earth station located in North Bay, ON with back-uparrangements in place in Canada and the USA.

Nav Canada manages multiple C-Band links between four major centres (Dorval,Gander, North Bay, and Edmonton) and northern remote communities throughoutNunavut to ensure safe air traffic control.

NWTel is a major user of C-band capacity throughout the North, and also to trunkIP traffic between Iqaluit and Telesat's Toronto teleport. This link supports theinternet connectivity into the community and Bell Mobility's HSPA mobileoffering, which launched in Iqaluit early in 2014 and is growing exponentially. Itis expected that additional C-band satellite capacity to support this service will berequired.

SSI Micro makes use of C-band transponders to trunk traffic between all 25communities in Nunavut and its hub located in Ottawa. The service supportscritical government applications and retail internet service.KRG/NICSN is a major user of C-band capacity to provide broadband data andother communications services to multiple native communities across Canada.

The C-band service for Bell Canada comprises a combination of point-to-pointlinks and demand assigned multiple access (DAMA) links. The point-to-pointlinks are of various data rates and provide connectivity between the Montrealteleport and 25 remote sites located in Northern Quebec and Northern Ontario.

Infosat Telecommunications operates a C-band broadband service between aVancouver hub and 26 remote sites across B.C. This network is viewed by theGovernment of B.C. as an important component in promoting economic growthinto northern and remote communities. The service provides broadbandconnectivity to allow isolated communities access to Internet and governmentservices.

SSC (Shared Services Canada) provides a C-band data service Ottawa-Iqaluit andOttawa-Resolute Bay. This service is used to connect government clients in theseremote areas to offices in Ottawa.

New Broadband Canada initiatives are targeting to use significant amounts ofC-band capacity to expand internet, video conferencing, and web applications inNorthern and remote areas of Canada.

Appendix 2

Photographs of Canadian Teleports providing C-band connectivity to variouscommunities across Canada.

The Montreal Teleport-~i

The Calgary Teleport

The Toronto Teleport

The Vancouver Teleport

TELUS COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY

Comments for

CONSULTATION on POLICY CHANGES in the 3500 MHz BAND (3475-3650 MHz) and a

NEW LICENSING PROCESS in RURAL AREAS

DGSO-003-14 August 2014

Spectrum Management and Telecommunications

October 8, 2014

ii

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 1

TELUS’ Reply to Specific Questions Posed by Industry Canada ................................................................ 4

8. Proposed Fundamental Reallocation of the 3500 MHz Band ............................................................. 4

6. Proposed New Classification of Tier 4 Service Areas — Rural vs. Urban ....................................... 11

7. FWA in Rural Areas ......................................................................................................................... 12

7.1 Proposed Licensing Process for FWA in Rural Tiers ................................................................. 12

7.2 Treatment of Incumbents in Rural Tier Areas ............................................................................ 13

7.4 Proposed Conditions of Licence for Existing and New FCFS FWA Licences ........................... 14

9. Treatment of Incumbent Licensees in Urban Tier 4 Areas Following a Proposed Fundamental Reallocation of the 3500 MHz Band ....................................................................................................... 16

9.2 Options for Displacement ........................................................................................................... 16

1

Executive Summary

1. TELUS appreciates the opportunity to provide comments.

2. The 3500 MHz band is a very large and imminently important band for the mobile

industry. Even after the upcoming AWS-3 and BRS auctions, at 175 MHz, the band would

represent1 over 22% of the total CRMS in Canada.

3. TELUS strongly supports a fundamental reallocation to mobile service. As Industry

Canada has identified in its 2013 Commercial Mobile Spectrum Outlook, the band

represents a large portion of the new CMRS targeted for release in Canada in the near

term. The world is in the process of migrating this spectrum to mobile use.

4. TELUS agrees with Industry Canada’s position2 that the spectrum must be “returned and

not renewed”. The primary FWA spectrum auction involved the sale of 3.6 billion MHz-

pops of FWA spectrum for less than 11 million dollars. These licences sat fallow in urban

markets through two operator driven deployment requirement extensions.

5. TELUS supports the intent of the proposed geographically differentiated policy but

recommends adjustments necessary to ensure that it can veer from a strict Tier 4 based

dividing line to support a natural market driven balance by geography between fixed and

mobile services.

6. TELUS believes that the proposals, coupled with TELUS’ recommended adjustments to

ensure that CMRS needs in secondary and tertiary markets in Canada are addressed at a

market driven pace, best meet the objectives taken into consideration by Industry Canada

when developing a policy and licensing framework for the 3500 MHz band. These

objectives, guided by the Spectrum Policy Framework for Canada, aim to maximize the

economic and social benefits that Canadians derive from the use of the radio frequency

spectrum, and achieve:

1 Over 22% is based on a total pool of 68 MHz MBS, 50 MHz of Cellular 850, 130 MHz of PCS, 90 MHz of

AWS-1, 50 MHz of AWS-3, 30 MHz of WCS, 190 MHz of BRS and 175 MHz of mobile 3500 MHz band. 2 Industry Canada Decisions Concerning the Renewal of 2300 MHz and 3500 MHz Licences, DGSO-004-13,

November 2013, para 35.

2

• robust investment and innovation by wireless telecommunications carriers such

that Canadians benefit from world-class networks and the latest technologies;

• sustained competition in the wireless telecommunications services market such

that consumers and businesses benefit from competitive pricing and choice in

service offerings; and

• availability of these benefits to Canadians across the country, including those in

rural areas, in a timely fashion.

7. In summary:

a. TELUS supports the proposal to fundamentally reallocate the 3500 MHz band

(3475-3650 MHz) to include mobile services and the proposed changes to the

Canadian Table of Frequency Allocations. Upon finalization of a Canadian

mobile band plan, fixed licences must be returned and the band reassigned via

auction.

b. TELUS recommends a different approach achieving the same objectives for the

geographically differentiated policy whereby mobile services are licensed

nationally but FWA operators have access to FCFS licensing in the band in rural

tiers up until the auction and then are displaced only on an as required basis.

c. TELUS does not oppose the proposal to make available spectrum licences in tier

areas classified as rural, through a first-come, first-served (FCFS) process.

TELUS does not oppose these licences being issued as annual spectrum licences,

defined on a per grid-cell basis and authorized only for the amount of spectrum

required to operate.

d. TELUS disagrees with the proposal to modify the current notification period for

existing point-to-point, fixed stations such that those affecting the implementation

of new FWA systems in rural Tier 4 areas would now be afforded a notification

period of six months. This is neither practical nor necessary.

3

e. TELUS supports the proposal to have the transition policy described in section 4

of Annex B apply to all FWA systems (i.e. existing FCFS and auctioned FWA

systems as listed in (v) and (vi)) within rural tiers. However, TELUS recommends

that the policy state that “Licences may be subject to a transition to a new band

plan and other relevant technical rules, if and when they are established to

facilitate the introduction of commercial mobile services in urban and rural

tiers”. (“and rural” added)

f. TELUS supports the conditions of licence in Annex B subject to, as above, the

inclusion of “and rural” in section 4.

g. TELUS supports either urban displacement option but believes that Option 2 is

superior for the industry as a whole. TELUS recommends a minor exception to

Option 2. TELUS recommends Option 2 generally with Option 1 for top urban

markets where mobile 3500 MHz deployments are first needed.

8. Further detail behind TELUS’ recommendations and comments is provided in the main

body of this document.

4

TELUS’ Reply to Specific Questions Posed by Industry Canada

9. TELUS believes that Questions 1, 2 and 3 follow from a respondent’s point of view on

Questions 7 and 8 and therefore answers the Questions in the following order – Q7, Q8,

Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4, Q5, Q6, Q9 to facilitate a streamlined response.

8. Proposed Fundamental Reallocation of the 3500 MHz Band

7. Industry Canada invites comments on its proposal to fundamentally reallocate the 3500 MHz band (3475-3650 MHz) to include mobile services and its proposed changes to the Canadian Table of Frequency Allocations as found in Annex C.

10. TELUS supports Industry Canada’s proposal to fundamentally reallocate the 3500 MHz

band (3475-3650 MHz) to include mobile services and its proposed changes to the

Canadian Table of Frequency Allocations as found in Annex C.

11. TELUS highlights that Industry Canada has progressively led up to this proposal through

a consultative process that has always noted a fundamental reallocation to mobile service

as a distinct possibility.

12. Industry Canada has previously3 stated:

The addition of mobile services constitutes a fundamental reallocation. The added regulatory flexibility to permit mobile services, together with the greater spectrum efficiencies associated with mobile technologies and the increased value associated with mobile spectrum, constitute a significant material change. (Emphasis added)

13. Most recently in the November 2013 Decisions Concerning the Renewal of 2300 MHz

and 3500 MHz Licences DGSO-004-13, Industry Canada stated in paragraph 35:

As noted in the consultation, licensees in the 3500 MHz band are hereby given advance notification that changes to the existing allocation and band plan may be considered in the next two to three years. As well, licensees are hereby given notice that, in the event

3 Approval Letter to Bell Canada and Rogers Communications Inc. Regarding Licence Transfer to Inukshuk

Wireless Partnership, March 30, 2006.

5

of a fundamental reallocation, Industry Canada would require that spectrum be returned (i.e. not renewed) (Emphasis added)

Fundamental Allocation Required

14. TELUS agrees that a fundamental reallocation is required.

15. The mobile industry needs more spectrum to meet customer demand and Industry Canada

has recently reported that the 3500 MHz band represents 100-175 MHz of the extra 300-

415 MHz of future mobile spectrum that the Department targets to release in Canada by

20174.

16. The FCC is well down a path to reband and mobilize the 3550 – 3650 MHz range within

the unique constraints in the US environment such as extensive military use of the band.

17. 3400 – 3600 MHz was first identified for mobile at the 2007 World Radiocommunication

Conference 5 and 3400-3800 MHz is now an approved candidate band for IMT

(international mobile telephony) at the upcoming 2015 World Radiocommunication

Conference6.

Licences Returned, Not Renewed

18. TELUS agrees that the spectrum must be returned (for reassignment, presumably via

auction) and not renewed.

19. TELUS notes that it makes this recommendation despite holding 124 FWA licences.

20. Originally allocated in 2004, 75% of the service areas in 3500 MHz band were still

fallow as of 2012 when a third deadline (second extension, to end of term) was sought by

industry and granted7.

4 March 2013 Commercial Mobile Spectrum Outlook, pg v, Executive Summary. 5 WRC-07 allocated the band 3400-3600 MHz to the Mobile, except Aeronautical Mobile Service on a primary

basis in a number of countries in Region 1 subject to provisions of RR 5.430A. 6 WRC-15 Agenda Item 1.1 7 DGSO-006-12 paragraphs 12 – 20.

6

21. In the primary 3500 MHz Fixed Wireless Access spectrum auction in February 2004,

bidders acquired, largely uncontested, 3.6 billion MHz-pops of FWA spectrum for

$10.7M or $0.003 per MHz-pop (less than a third of a cent per MHz-pop). Over half

(348 of 676) of the FWA licences at auction went unsold (i.e., there was only speculative

demand). The auction quickly ended in 20 rounds. The licences that did sell went at or

near the reserve price. This low level of interest was driven by:

a. A 55 MHz aggregate CMRS spectrum cap regime in place in Canada which

suggests (with all then current Canadian operators at or near the cap) that no

mobile operator was bidding for FWA with the view that it would become mobile

spectrum.

b. No visibility at the time of the FWA auction in Canada, to a future 3500 MHz

mobile conversion which was not identified by the WRC until 2007. (2500 MHz

spectrum had been recently identified at WRC03 for future conversion to mobile

but Industry Canada had not yet released its consultation on the mobile

conversion of 2500 MHz spectrum which came out in April 2004. 2500 MHz

spectrum, let alone 3500 MHz spectrum, was still considered too high a frequency

in practical terms for existing cell site densities. At the time of the FWA auction

in Canada, there was also no visibility to the 2006 2500 MHz Policy which

provided incumbent fixed service licence holders with a mobile conversion

windfall.)

c. No visibility at the time of the FWA auction in Canada to the inflection point in

mobile data use in 2007 spurred by new smartphones which made all available

spectrum more necessary to accommodate consumer demand or to the resultant

rapid acceleration in the densification of mobile networks, leading to the new

found efficacy of 3500 MHz for small cell mobile network applications.

22. Anything but a full recall of the 3500 MHz band for a fundamental reallocation to mobile

service would be a detriment to most industry parties to the benefit of Bell and Rogers,

who were already the two prime beneficiaries of a 2500 MHz mobile conversion

windfall. The entire 3500 MHz band needs to be recalled, re-banded and re-auctioned to

7

drive competition in the mobile industry in this imminently important mobile band, and

to get a return for the taxpayer commensurate with the value of the spectrum.

Canadian Table of Frequency Allocations (CTFA)

23. Some respondents might suggest that the CTFA need not be updated at this juncture as

the final mobile band edges are not yet known. TELUS supports the Department’s

proposed changes. This is desirable in terms of providing clarity and represents progress.

Such updates do not preclude any future fine tuning if required.

24. The updates allow Industry Canada to implement and update new fixed and mobile

policy in the band and do not constrain the final decisions.

Band Plan Considerations

25. Both the Department in the consultation and the RABC submission essentially note that

there is not yet a clear path forward for a mobile band plan in Canada and a future mobile

transition consultation process is required. Developments in various sub ranges of the

band 3400 – 3800 MHz are progressing steadily by regulators and industry stakeholders

motivated to achieve long term commercial mobile spectrum release targets and exploit

opportunities to further the trend toward increased global harmonization.

26. While TELUS has a general bias toward harmonization with the US, the recent FCC

NPRM and Order8 on the 3550 – 3650 MHz band in the US supports the development of

a US mobile broadband ecosystem that relies on access to only 40% of the US population

and potentially leaves the use of 75 MHz of Canadian spectrum (3475 – 3550 MHz)

undefined. On the other hand, current and emerging European and Asian band plans do

not align well with the current Canadian allocation either. TELUS believes that Canada

is best served holding off on a decision on a band plan until the US situation is finalized

and there is clarity on European developments post WRC-15.

8 FCC 12-148, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Order, December 12, 2012, GN Docket No. 12-354,

Amendment of the Commission’s Rules with Regard to Commercial Operations in the 3550-3650 MHz band.

8

8. Industry Canada invites comments on its geographically differentiated policy where mobile services will be allowed in urban tiers, and fixed services will be allowed in rural tiers (refer to Section 6 for the definition of urban and rural tiers).

27. TELUS does not support Industry Canada’s geographically differentiated policy where

mobile services will be allowed in urban tiers, and only fixed services will be allowed in

rural tiers as proposed, but recognizes the intent of Industry Canada’s proposal. TELUS

offers a slightly different approach achieving the same objectives.

Urban Classified Service Areas

28. Industry Canada proposes to fundamentally reallocate to mobile service the majority of

the band on a population weighted basis. TELUS supports the policy as it applies to

urban tiers.

29. Industry Canada is proposing that henceforth there be no new licensing in urban

classified service areas and that all remaining licensees in urban classified service areas

will be displaced (either upon a date certain, Option 1, or as required, Option 2) upon a

fundamental reallocation of the band to mobile service. TELUS supports this proposed

urban displacement and would support either displacement option, but agrees with the

RABC that Option 2 is the best. TELUS agrees that there should be no further licensing

of fixed services in urban classified service areas. After 10 years since the FWA band

was assigned, displacement Option 2 would handle any “false positive” areas in the urban

tiers that should have remained rural. Deployments such as these could continue to

operate indefinitely as no displacement would be required.

Rural Classified Service Areas

30. TELUS recognizes that, in principle, mobile subscriber density is low enough in truly

rural and remote areas (not to be confused with Tier 4 service areas). As a result, mobile

users in these truly rural and remote areas would presumably not experience any ill

effects from the reduced availability of industry mobile network capacity (as compared to

other areas) and that this would facilitate the delivery of FWA services in the band in

these areas.

9

31. However, unlike urban tiers, there does not appear to be any mechanism proposed to

address the current and future “false negatives” (service areas classified as rural that have

or will have a need for mobile services in the 3500 MHz band):

a. As we explore below, Tier 4 service areas are not a perfect proxy for an urban /

rural split. Some service areas are in TELUS’ view miscategorised based on the

proposed criteria.

b. Enterprise customers have concentrated mobile service needs that are not directly

correlated with census population centre metrics.

c. Communities such as emerging resource development centres may in the future

need the mobile capacity of the 3500 MHz band.

d. Even small population centres host large scale events (e.g., festivals, etc.) and

short term mobile network capacity becomes an issue.

32. TELUS believes that in the long term, mobile services will be seen as the higher use in

many parts of what are proposed now to be classified as rural service areas. To address

this TELUS proposes that the geographically differentiated policy be as described below:

a. Rural tiers should be included in the future fundamental reallocation to mobile

service through a competitive licensing process.

b. Displacement of FWA and other services in rural tiers would be on an “Option 2”

basis (i.e., only as required).

c. FCFS FWA licensing would be permitted up until the auction subject to (a) and

(b) above.

33. Thus, TELUS supports the proposed geographically differentiated policy if it is

structured to ensure that CMRS needs in secondary and tertiary markets in Canada are

addressed at a market driven pace. Industry Canada has consistently advocated for rural

and remote Canadians to have access to the same services as urban Canadians and the

geographically differentiated policy as proposed threatens this objective. The near term

10

need for CMRS is supported by the urban tiers but the policy must accommodate the

certain need to expand the geography of 3500 MHz band mobile services in the future

beyond the urban tiers. TELUS recommends a national mobile band plan with

displacement of FWA deployments on an as required basis. TELUS suggests that the

market can find the natural balance by geography between fixed and mobile.

34. TELUS notes that RABC does not support the proposed geographically differentiated

policy because it represents an inefficient use of spectrum:

It would be technically challenging to control co-frequency fixed/mobile interference without significant separation distances. Such distance separation along all urban / rural service boundary lines represents an inefficient use of spectrum in these border zones. One study suggested separation distances in excess of 80km might be needed

35. TELUS concurs but does not see this as a show stopper for a geographically

differentiated policy. TELUS is of the view, however, that while setting the granularity at

a Tier 4 level is practical, the policy needs to support bending to the natural balance

intended by such a geographically differentiated policy. There must be support for the

delivery of high capacity mobile service, as needed, to subsets of the rural tiers over the

course of time as Canada’s digital strategy materializes. At 175 MHz, this one large band

represents9 over 22% of the entire CMRS pool in Canada.

9 The over 22% metric is based on a total pool of 68 MHz MBS, 50 MHz of Cellular 850, 130 MHz of PCS, 90 MHz of AWS-1, 50 MHz of AWS-3, 30 MHz of WCS, 190 MHz of BRS and 175 MHz of mobile 3500 MHz band.

11

6. Proposed New Classification of Tier 4 Service Areas — Rural vs. Urban

1. Industry Canada invites comments on its proposal to classify Tier 4 service areas as either urban or rural for the band 3475-3650 MHz, using Statistics Canada’s 2011 definition for population centres, as outlined in Annex A.

36. Subject to TELUS recommendations to alter the proposed geographically differentiated

policy (whereby mobile services are licensed nationally but FWA operators have access

to FCFS licensing in the band in rural tiers up until the auction), TELUS generally

supports the proposed classification formula.

37. TELUS has a concern with a strictly formulaic approach to the classification because

certain service areas would be defined as rural even though they have urban

characteristics. Therefore, unless Industry Canada follows TELUS’ recommendations for

the geographically differentiated policy, these service areas should be classified as urban

despite not meeting the Department’s criteria. Some potential examples of such markets

are Whistler, Prince Rupert, Fort St. John, Whitehorse, Yellowknife, Salmon Arm,

Lloydminster, Gravenhurst, Pembroke, Brockville, Cobourg, Sept-Iles, Saint Georges,

New Glasgow, Truro, and Edmundston.

38. For the purposes of this consultation, TELUS does not believe that applying the census-

based pop centre rule captures all ‘urban-like’ markets which are well suited for the

small-cell mobile application envisioned for the 3500 MHz band. As such TELUS

reiterates its modified proposal for an urban / rural geographic differentiated policy

described above whereby mobile services are licensed nationally but FWA operators

have access to FCFS licensing in the band in rural tiers up until the auction and then

displacement is only on an as required basis. TELUS notes that displacement by mobile

services in rural tiers would only occur many years from now and only in a few small

pockets of density within the massive rural tiers, leaving these rural tiers predominantly

available for the provision of FWA services in perpetuity as Industry Canada’s proposal

for a geographically differentiated policy seeks to achieve. TELUS’ recommendation,

however, addresses the shortcoming of Industry Canada’s proposal in terms of making

the benefits of 3500 MHz mobile services available in rural tiers where it makes sense.

12

7. FWA in Rural Areas

7.1 Proposed Licensing Process for FWA in Rural Tiers

2. Industry Canada invites comments on its proposal to make available spectrum licences in tier areas classified as rural, through a first-come, first-served process.

39. TELUS does not oppose Industry Canada’s proposal to license available spectrum in

rural tiers on an FCFS basis.

40. TELUS would note that new FCFS licensees should be made aware (through expanded

language in the Displacement COL as suggested below) that displacement is a very real

potential in the future. Thus FCFS applicants would want to either have a business case

with quick payback or be applying for an area where it would be unlikely that significant

mobile service demand would result in displacement by a mobile operator.

41. TELUS suggests that the Displacement COL be expanded as follows:

Licences may be subject to a transition to a new band plan and other relevant technical rules, if and when they are established to facilitate the introduction of commercial mobile services in urban tiers and rural tiers

3. Industry Canada invites comments on these licences being issued as annual spectrum licences, defined on a per grid-cell basis and authorized only for the amount of spectrum required to operate (refer to Section 7.3).

42. TELUS supports the proposal for annual spectrum licences.

43. TELUS is not opposed to grid licensing to address the needs of localized FWA

deployments especially within rural service areas that can be geographically massive, but

notes that in other cases, grid licensing can exacerbate interference management. TELUS

therefore prefers Tier 4 licensing. TELUS notes that the RABC supports Tier 4 licensing

and not grid based licensing because:

13

Grid licensing would exacerbate the adjacent-system interference issues and need for significant separation distances.

44. TELUS concurs but does not see this as a show stopper for a geographically

differentiated policy. TELUS is of the view, however, that while setting the granularity at

a Tier 4 level is practical, the policy needs to support bending to the natural balance

intended by such a geographically differentiated policy. There must be support for the

delivery of high capacity mobile service, as needed, to subsets of the rural tiers over the

course of time as Canada’s digital strategy materializes and grid licensing is a facilitator

of this. At 175 MHz, this one large band represents10 over 22% of the entire CMRS pool

in Canada.

45. TELUS supports the proposal that FCFS licences be authorized only for the amount of

spectrum required to operate and as little as 5 MHz. TELUS notes that in a broadband

society, larger bandwidths should become the norm. The RABC calls for a minimum and

multiples of 10 MHz. TELUS notes that an applicant can ask for 10 MHz if needed so

TELUS is fine with 5 MHz minimum blocks as proposed. TELUS notes that where

smaller bandwidth assignments suffice for one licensee, this leaves larger contiguous

blocks available for others.

7.2 Treatment of Incumbents in Rural Tier Areas

4. Industry Canada invites comments on its proposal to modify the current notification period for existing point-to-point, fixed stations such that those affecting the implementation of new FWA systems in rural Tier 4 areas would now be afforded a notification period of six months.

46. TELUS does not support the proposal to modify the current notification period for

existing point-to-point, fixed stations such that those affecting the implementation of new

FWA systems in rural Tier 4 areas would now be afforded a notification period of only

six months. Six months notification would not take into account the unique

characteristics associated with deployment of facilities in some of these remote areas.

10 ibid.

14

47. In rural tiers, some of these existing point to point, fixed stations are supporting rural and

remote POTS services and are solar powered and require helicopter access. While it is

unlikely that they would need to be displaced by FWA services, six months would be an

unreasonably short window given the complexity involved. This is neither practical nor

necessary. TELUS recommends that the existing three year displacement window be

retained.

5. Industry Canada invites comments on its proposal to have the transition policy described in section 4 of Annex B apply to all FWA systems (i.e. existing FCFS and auctioned FWA systems as listed in (v) and (vi)) within rural tiers.

48. TELUS supports the proposal to have the transition policy described in section 4 of

Annex B apply to all FWA systems (i.e. existing FCFS and auctioned FWA systems as

listed in (v) and (vi)) within rural tiers.

49. This is a very important proposal as it may be determined through future consultation that

mobile services should be authorized in all service areas across Canada. It is TELUS’

view that they should, while still retaining flexibility for FWA use in rural tiers.

50. As such, TELUS believes that the transition policy described in section 4 of Annex B

needs to be updated to say (bold words need to be added):

Licences may be subject to a transition to a new band plan and other relevant technical rules, if and when they are established to facilitate the introduction of commercial mobile services in urban tiers and rural tiers

7.4 Proposed Conditions of Licence for Existing and New FCFS FWA Licences

6. Industry Canada invites comments on the conditions of licence in Annex B.

51. TELUS supports the proposed conditions of licence in Annex B.

52. TELUS notes that per its response to Question 5 above, that the COL regarding

displacement is critical.

15

53. As such, TELUS believes that the transition policy described in section 4 of Annex B

needs to be updated to say (bold words need to be added):

Licences may be subject to a transition to a new band plan and other relevant technical rules, if and when they are established to facilitate the introduction of commercial mobile services in urban tiers and rural tiers

16

9. Treatment of Incumbent Licensees in Urban Tier 4 Areas Following a Proposed

Fundamental Reallocation of the 3500 MHz Band

9.2 Options for Displacement

9. Industry Canada invites comments on its two proposed options for displacement.

54. The two options proposed are:

a. Option 1 – Displacement of existing licensees in urban tiers within a minimum of

one year of the release of a future new licensing framework and 3500 MHz band

plan.

b. Option 2 – Displacement of existing licensees in urban tiers only if, and as

required, after commercial mobile licences are issued. Licensees would have one

year to transition once notified by the Department.

55. Option 1 prescribes a date certain but reserves the right to determine said date in the

future, prescribing only that it be at least a year from licensing framework issue. This

approach simplifies the planning and deployment phase for future CMRS licensees.

TELUS does not oppose this option.

56. Option 2 does not set a broad deadline but manages displacement on an exception basis.

TELUS recognizes that this would be beneficial to FWA operators servicing markets that

would not have an imminent need for 3500 MHz mobile services deployment but are

otherwise within an urban tier. As a prospective CMRS licensee in the band TELUS

would be willing to work with Option 2 and sees this option as superior overall for the

industry, as does the RABC. TELUS would recommend, however, that if Industry

Canada decided on Option 2 in general, that Industry Canada consider an Option 1

approach (displacement by some predetermined date certain) in a small set of top urban

markets (such as Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, etc.) where the need to deploy 3500

MHz spectrum for expanded capacity was imminent. The final list of top urban markets

17

for Option 1 displacement could be determined as part of the licensing framework

consultation.

** End of document **

Industry Canada

Consultation on Policy Changes in the 3500 MHz Band (3475-3650 MHz) and a New

Licensing Process in Rural Areas

Gazette Notice DGSO-003-14

August 19, 2014

Submitted by Dr. Michael McNally, University of Alberta

October 8, 2014

1

Table of Contents

1. RESPONSE TO PROPOSALS 1 AND 8 ..............................................................................................2

2. RESPONSE TO PROPOSAL 2...........................................................................................................3

3. GENERAL COMMENTS ..................................................................................................................3

2

Response to Proposals 1 and 8

1. The impact of classifying Tier 4 service areas as either urban or rural is difficult to assess without

more information. Specifically, without information on the number of rural households with

Fixed Wireless Access (FWA) that may fall in tiers classified as urban, it is challenging to

determine the potential negative impacts such a classification would have.

2. While the Spectrum Policy Framework for Canada (SPFC) notes that there was opposition to

using population density to define rural areas,1 an examination of population density does

reveal that the proposed approach will result in some curious classifications. For example, Fort

Erie, ON (Tier 4-083), which ranks 7th among Tier 4 service areas in terms of population density,

will be classified as rural because its population it lacks a population centre with 30,000 people.2

While the population here is small, the Tier is comprised of only seven grid-cells,3 and when

viewed in terms of population density it appears far more urban than rural.

3. Conversely, while the city of Fort McMurray, AB is clearly urban; however, its Tier 4 service area

(4-146) is 104,457 km2.4 This represents about 15 percent of the entire province of Alberta.

While it is certainly logical to classify the city of Fort McMurray as urban, the large swath of

Alberta covered by this service area is clearly rural.

4. Given that Industry Canada is proposing a mechanism for licenses for FWA service in tiers

classified as rural only (Proposal 2), the department should carefully examine cases where

geographically large Tiers are being classified as urban. Rural Canadians in such urban tiers

would not benefit from the potential licensing for FWA service on the grid-cell level that is being

proposed for rural tiers.

5. In this regard Industry Canada should specifically consider the impacts of the urban classification

on several Tier 4 service areas with very large areas (for example those greater than 25,000

km2), which would include the following:

a. Fort McMurray (Tier 4-146), 104,457 km2

b. Prince Albert (Tier 4-128), 71,453 km2

c. Prince George (Tier 4-167), 51,706 km2

1 Industry Canada. 2007. Spectrum Policy Framework for Canada. http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-

gst.nsf/eng/sf08776.html 2 Density calculations are based from data provided by Industry Canada (Industry Canada. N.d. “Service Areas for

Competitive Licensing: Tier 4 – 172 Local Service Areas.” http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf05909.html 3 Industry Canada. N.d. “Service Areas for Competitive Licensing: 4-083 – Fort Erie.”

http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf05822.html 4 (Industry Canada. N.d. “Service Areas for Competitive Licensing: Tier 4 – 172 Local Service Areas.”

http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf05909.html

3

d. Sudbury (Tier 4-100), 45,500 km2

e. Grande Prairie (Tier 4-148), 45,444 km2

f. Moose Jaw (Tier 4-121), 31,891 km2

g. Lethbridge (Tier 4-132), 28,879 km2

h. Medicine Hat/Brooks (Tier 4-131), 27,174 km2

i. Red Deer (Tier 4-137), 26,172 km2

Response to Proposal 2

6. As noted above, Industry Canada should carefully consider the impact of an urban classification

on geographically large tiers, as rural Canadians in such tiers would not benefit from this

proposal.

General Comments

7. There is clear need for a more coherent and holistic approach to spectrum management in rural

areas. None of the enabling guidelines in the SPFC deal explicitly with promoting wireless

services (FWA, commercial mobile or satellite) in rural communities.5 Although urban Canada

clearly has a large demand for commercial mobile services, spectrum is particularly vital to rural

Canadians as it can provide both mobile and fixed broadband access.

8. Without a more holistic approach to spectrum management in rural Canada, issues have to be

decided in a fragmented manner from consultation to consultation. For example in the recent

AWS-3 consultation, services for rural Canadians will be heavily influenced by Tier 2 and Tier 3

deployment requirements.6 In the 700MHz Policy Framework HSPA network footprint was used

to guide rural deployment, and the possible expansion of RP-019 was raised.7 In the 3500 MHz

consultation, Industry Canada is proposing licenses for FWA services in rural Tier 4 services areas

on a grid-cell basis.8 While the department should be commended for not taking a simple ‘one

size fits all’ approach to rural spectrum management issues, there is a need for a more cohesive

5 Industry Canada. 2007. Spectrum Policy Framework for Canada. http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-

gst.nsf/eng/sf08776.html 6 Industry Canada. 2014. Consultation on the Technical, Policy and Licensing Framework for Advanced Wireless

Services in the Bands 1755-1780 MHz and 2155-2180 MHz (AWS-3). Gazette Notice SLPB-004-14. http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf10851.html 7 Industry Canada. 2012. Policy and Technical Framework: Mobile Broadband Services (MBS) – 700 MHz Band,

Broadband Radio Services (BRS) – 2500 MHz Band. SMSE-002-12. http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf10121.html 8 Industry Canada. 2014. Consultation on Policy Changes in the 3500 MHz Band (3475-3650 MHz) and a New

Licensing Process in Rural Areas. Gazette Notice DGSO-003-14. http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf10841.html

4

approach that guides spectrum management issues in rural Canada both within each individual

consultation and most importantly across consultations for various bands.

9. Finally, a rural spectrum strategy needs to better integrate with rural broadband policy in

general. The Policy Objectives for the 3500 MHz consultation states:

The Government of Canada is committed to ensuring that Canadians benefit from

the availability of advanced, competitively priced telecommunications services in all

regions of the country. In its Economic Action Plan 2014, the Government

reaffirmed its commitment to extend and enhance broadband Internet services in

rural and northern communities in order to meet the continued demand for fixed

services in rural areas.9

While the announcement in Economic Action Plan 2014 (which is now known as the “Connecting

Canadians” Program) is another step towards a rural broadband strategy, the potential

interaction between the proposed changes to the 3500 MHz band and Connecting Canadians

raises some questions. It is not clear if some of the areas that are ineligible for funding through

the Connecting Canadians program (because of the availability of FWA) will lose access based on

proposed changes to the 3500 MHz band (because they would live in rural parts of tiers

classified as urban).

10. For example, according to the Connecting Canadians program several of the grid-cells in south-

eastern Alberta, east of Cressday (within Tier 4-131) are ineligible because of the availability of

FWA from Corridor Communications and direct-to-home satellite service from Xplornet.10 It is

proposed that Tier 4-131 be classified as urban. As such some of these rural Albertans may lose

their FWA access, and would be totally reliant on direct-to-home satellite service, thus

diminishing options for rural broadband access.

9 Industry Canada. 2014. Consultation on Policy Changes in the 3500 MHz Band (3475-3650 MHz) and a New

Licensing Process in Rural Areas. Gazette Notice DGSO-003-14. http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf10841.html, para. 6. 10

Industry Canada. 2014. “Is Your Community Eligible?” http://www.ic.gc.ca/app/sitt/bbmap/hm.html

 

 

BY E spect SenioSpectIndus300 SOttaw Dear

consuXplor

CJP/ Enclo

XPL625 Cochran

ELECTRON

trum.engine

or Director trum Develostry Canada Slater Street wa, ON K1A

Sir/Madam,

CConsultati

Pursuant ultation, plearnet Broadba

   

osure

ORNET COMMne Drive ● Suit

NIC MAIL

eering@ic.g

opment and O

(JETN, 15th

A 0H5

,

anada Gazeion on Polic

and a N

to the prase find attaand Inc.

 

MUNICATIONte 1000 ● Ma

gc.ca

Operations

h)

ette Part 1, cy Changes iNew Licensi

rocedures sached the co

 

NS INC.  ● XPLrkham, Ontar

O

August 19, in the 3500 ng Process

set forth inomments of

  Y

C

LORNET BROArio ● L3R 9R9 

EXECUTI

October 8, 2

2014, DGSOMHz Bandin Rural Ar

n the abovf Xplornet C

Yours truly,

Christine J. P

ADBAND INC. ● www.xplor

IVE VICE PRESIDENT, GEN

DIR

E‐MAIL: cj.prudha

2014

O-003-14, d (3475-3650reas

ve-referenceCommunicat

Prudham

 net.com 

CHRISTINE J. PRUDHANERAL COUNSEL/SECRETARECT LINE: 905‐944‐79am@corp.xplornet.co

0 MHz)

ed notice otions Inc. an

AM ARY 952 om 

of nd

Canada Gazette, Part I, August 19, 2014

DGSO-003-14

Consultation on Policy Changes in the 3500 MHz Band (3475-3650 MHz) and a New Licensing Process in Rural Areas

Comments of

Xplornet Communications Inc. and Xplornet Broadband Inc.

October 8, 2014

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. These comments are submitted by Xplornet Communications Inc. and Xplornet

Broadband Inc. (collectively “Xplornet”) pursuant to the directions on procedure set

forth in the Department’s Consultation on Policy Changes in the 3500 MHz Band

(3475-3650 MHz) and a New Licensing Process in Rural Areas, DGSO-003-14, (the

“Consultation Paper”), dated August 19, 2014.

2. Xplornet agrees with the basic principles that the Minister of Industry has articulated

regarding the use of the 3500 MHz spectrum band. We agree that:

(a) the Government of Canada has an obligation to put the interests of Canadian

consumers first,

(b) spectrum licences should only be renewed if the licensees have met all the

conditions of the licences and those who have not used the spectrum, should

lose it,

(c) Canadians will benefit from additional quality spectrum being deployed

across the country that will lead to affordable and reliable high-speed

Internet service using the latest technologies at the best prices, and

(d) fixed wireless services in rural areas should continue and expand to meet

people’s needs with additional capacity, while the future needs for

- 2 -

additional capacity to provide mobile services in metropolitan areas should

be addressed.

3. Xplornet does not believe the Consultation Paper implements those objectives.

Instead, the proposal in the Consultation Paper does the following:

(a) puts the interests of mobile carriers ahead of the interests of 50% of all

Canadian consumers living in rural areas,

(b) takes away spectrum from licensees who have met all the conditions of their

licences and are using the spectrum today to connect Canadians to the

Internet,

(c) reduces the amount of spectrum being deployed across the country and shuts

off affordable and reliable high-speed Internet service that is being used

with latest technologies,

(d) turns off fixed wireless services in rural areas and provides no alternative for

the future in those areas, and

(e) provides more spectrum for mobile on top of the 700 MHz, AWS-3, AWS-4

and 2500 MHz spectrum recently made available but not yet deployed.

4. Xplornet submits that the Government of Canada, in implementing a new spectrum

policy, should first do no harm so as to preserve the benefits that have been achieved

for Canadians through the use of the 3500 MHz band. It should then look for

opportunities to augment those benefits by making more of that spectrum available for

fixed wireless Internet access and other uses, such as incremental future mobile

services.

5. Xplornet is not supportive of splitting the use of the 3500 MHz band into urban and

rural licence areas. The methodology used results in 50% of all Canadians that

Statistics Canada considers rural being deemed to live in “urban” areas. This results

from that fact that the Tier 4 licence areas combine high density urban areas with low

density rural areas. If a small geographic area within a Tier 4 licence is found to be

- 3 -

“urban”, then the entire Tier 4 area is deemed “urban”, including the 80%+ of the

geographic area that is, in fact, rural.

6. The inability to truly separate people living in urban and rural areas, coupled with the

technical complexities of attempting to operate fixed and mobile networks in adjacent

areas, make the proposals in the Consultation Paper unworkable.

7. The proposals, if implemented, would have the effect of reducing Internet availability

to over a million Canadians, shutting off over a quarter of a million Canadians who

have Internet service today and reducing the choice of service for millions more.

8. For these reasons, Xplornet believes that Industry Canada should step back from the

proposals in the Consultation Paper. Instead, Industry Canada should undertake to

assess the need for spectrum to provide Internet services to Canadians, particularly

those living in rural areas, and should undertake a consultation on a band plan for 3500

MHz prior to implementing any new policies.

9. In addition, Industry Canada should consider making additional spectrum available for

fixed wireless Internet access. To the extent a specific frequency within the 3500

MHz band is to be made available for mobile services, Industry Canada needs to make

replacement spectrum available for fixed wireless Internet access to ensure Canadians

continue to benefit from being part of the digital world. To accomplish this, Xplornet

suggests that splitting the 3500 MHz band by frequency is a better solution than

splitting the band geographically.

10. Finally, Xplornet strongly believes that no Canadian should lose their Internet service

they have today. Absent replacement spectrum, there should be no displacement of

licensees who have met all the conditions of licence and are using the spectrum for the

benefit of Canadians. Xplornet supports the policy of “use or lose” spectrum.

Xplornet does not support the Consultation Paper’s “use and lose” policies.

- 4 -

INTRODUCTION

11. As Canada’s largest rural broadband provider, deploying fixed wireless and satellite

broadband services across all regions of Canada, Xplornet welcomes the opportunity

to provide comments on the policies regarding the use of the 3500 MHz spectrum

band and its role in the provision of wireless telecommunications services in Canada.

12. Based on available data from Industry Canada’s website, Xplornet believes it has the

largest deployment of fixed wireless access services using the 3500 MHz spectrum in

Canada.

13. Over 90% of Xplornet’s 3500 MHz spectrum licences have been fully deployed,

meeting all of the terms and conditions in the licences. The final licences are in the

process of being fully deployed in accordance with their licence terms and will be put

to use providing fixed wireless Internet access services.

14. Xplornet uses its licensed 3500 MHz radio spectrum to provide fast, affordable and

reliable fixed wireless access Internet service to Canadians. Connectivity to the

Internet is very important to Canadians and has been a priority of the Government of

Canada. It is the mission of Xplornet and we have invested hundreds of millions of

dollars over the last decade to build an extensive fixed wireless network with

customers across the country. That infrastructure is supported by over 2,000 network

technicians, dealers and installers across the country. All of this effort and investment

supports a fixed wireless Internet service that is used by over a quarter of a million

Canadians every day.

15. In short, Xplornet has done everything the Government of Canada asked of its 3500

MHz licensees. Every licence condition is being met and the Government’s policy

objective of providing fixed wireless access in rural Canada, the very purpose of the

3500 MHz spectrum, is being fulfilled.

16. Xplornet is disappointed that, as written, the Consultation Paper proposes to reverse

much of what has been done in the last decade to connect Canadians and bring Internet

services to those living outside Canada’s major cities. The policy proposed in the

- 5 -

Consultation Paper disproportionately favors the projected need for more mobile

wireless spectrum at the expense of basic Internet access for existing fixed wireless

customers.

17. In establishing spectrum policy, Industry Canada must strike a reasoned and

proportioned balance between the needs of all Canadians. Xplornet believes that

Industry Canada must take into account the needs of rural residents and businesses in

Canada and should not place a disproportionate emphasis on urban mobile wireless

providers.

18. As indicated in the Consultation Paper, Industry Canada should take “into

consideration the need to provide spectrum access for services and technologies; the

impacts of the framework on all stakeholders; and the Spectrum Policy Framework for

Canada (SPFC).”1 We trust that Industry Canada will continue to pursue its objective

of “maximizing the economic and social benefits that Canadians derive from the use of

the radio frequency spectrum”2. However, the proposals set out in the Consultation

Paper do not fulfill this objective.

19. Two years ago, Industry Canada requested comments on changes to the 3500 MHz

spectrum band.3 In response, Xplornet asked Industry Canada to enforce the spectrum

licensing rules or make more spectrum available because one licensee, Inukshuk

Wireless Partnership, had purchased 75% of the 3500 MHz spectrum band and was, by

its own admission, sitting on that spectrum waiting for it to be made mobile.4

20. Xplornet never imagined that the Government of Canada’s solution to this problem

would be to take away the 3500 MHz spectrum being used by fixed wireless providers,

in compliance with the licence terms, to provide Internet service to Canadians in rural

areas and give it to the mobile service providers. Regrettably, that is exactly what the

Consultation Paper proposes to do. 1 Consultation Paper, para. 5. 2 Ibid, para. 5. 3 Consultation on Renewal Process for 2300 MHz and 3500 MHz Licences, DGSO-006-12, October 2012 (the

“2012 Consultation Paper”). 4 Inukshuk Wireless Partnership Comments on the 2012 Consultation Paper, December 17, 2012, paragraphs E-1

and 56.

- 6 -

21. Xplornet believes that the proposals put forward in the Consultation Paper are biased

towards allowing for more mobile spectrum without due consideration being given to

the customers of fixed wireless Internet access services. Therefore, the proposals put

at risk what Xplornet believes to be the Government’s objectives of putting the

interests of all Canadian consumers first and improving Canada’s digital connectivity.

FRAMEWORK FOR COMMENTS

22. Later in this document, Xplornet provides detailed comments in response to the

questions raised in the Consultation Paper. However, before doing so, Xplornet

respectfully submits that the Consultation Paper presupposes an outcome for the 3500

MHz band that we believe leaves out an important discussion regarding the needs of

all Canadians. Before answering specific questions, we would like to provide a more

inclusive perspective and an alternative framework for considering the future of the

3500 MHz band.

23. It is clear that Industry Canada is focussed on making more spectrum available for

mobile use, as evidenced by the Commercial Mobile Spectrum Outlook (the

“Outlook”).5 The conclusions in the Outlook have never been subject to public debate,

yet it is cited as the reason why more mobile spectrum must be made available

everywhere.

24. Notably, the Outlook states that high demand growth for spectrum is limited to

metropolitan areas. In Annex A on page 50 this is acknowledged:

“The intensity of spectrum use is geographically non-uniform — the spectrum demand for less densely populated areas [is] not as high as it is for more metropolitan areas. There are less-populated areas of Canada where the cellular spectrum (licensed almost 30 years ago) is not yet used. Furthermore, there are many rural and lower population density areas where the PCS spectrum (licensed 10 to17 years ago) is also not completely used today. The peak demand for spectrum is in the large metropolitan areas (such as areas including Greater Toronto, Vancouver, Montréal, etc.). Therefore, the forecasting for spectrum use must be focused in these areas of high demand.”6

5 Industry Canada, Commercial Mobile Spectrum Outlook, March 2013. 6 Ibid, page 50.

- 7 -

In other words, the forecasted need for mobile spectrum in the Outlook does not apply

to everywhere in Canada. The need is only based on the metro areas which are

Canada’s largest cities.

25. Given the geographic limitations stated in the Outlook, it is unclear how Industry

Canada made the conceptual leap from spectrum demand in major metropolitan areas

such as Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal identified in the Outlook, to concluding in

the Consultation Paper that more mobile spectrum must be needed in Joliette Quebec,

Chatham Ontario, Grand Prairie Alberta and Courtenay British Columbia. There is

undoubtedly customer demand for mobile services (as there is demand for fixed

wireless Internet access) in all areas of Canada, but that customer demand does not

mean there is uniform spectrum demand in all areas of Canada because, as the Outlook

acknowledges, not all mobile spectrum is in use today throughout the country.7

26. The Consultation Paper presupposes an outcome - that the 3500 MHz must be re-

designated for mobile use. In doing so, it fails to start by asking what the best use of

this spectrum should be.

27. Xplornet could provide ample facts to refute the presumption that more mobile

spectrum is required everywhere. Likewise, Xplornet can provide data, from the same

reports referenced in the Outlook, to support the view that 250 MHz to 500 MHz of

spectrum is required to meet the fixed wireless Internet needs of Canadians over the

next five to 10 years.8 Given wireline options are limited or non-existent in rural areas,

spectrum must support the considerable demands of the fixed Internet connection as

well as the mobile services of Canadians in these areas. However, this information

was not invited as part of the consultation process.

28. Prior to a fundamental reallocation, Industry Canada has an obligation to undertake a

detailed review and assessment of the spectrum needed for both fixed and mobile

purposes in the relevant regions. Xplornet acknowledges that mobile data traffic will

7 Outlook, page 50. 8 Fixed connection Internet traffic is expected to grow 20% per year between 2013 and 2018. By 2018, 85% of

data will still be delivered through a fixed Internet connection and only 15% will be through a mobile connection. Source: “The Zettabyte Era: Trends and Analysis”, Cisco, June 10, 2014, Table 7 and Figure 11.

- 8 -

grow but respectfully submits that fixed data traffic will also continue to grow and will

continue to be of significantly larger in magnitude than mobile traffic in Canada.

Without a proper assessment, Industry Canada will not have all the facts to make a fair

and reasoned determination regarding the best use for the 3500 MHz spectrum.

29. In the absence of a report on the need for fixed wireless spectrum, Xplornet believes

Industry Canada still has strong evidence today. The 3500 MHz spectrum is being

used today to provide fixed wireless Internet access to hundreds of thousands of

Canadians. The Consultation Paper does not provide a plan for how those Canadians

continue to receive service after the transition to mobile and the displacement of

existing fixed wireless networks. This stands in contrast to the extensive transition

plan that was created for over the air broadcasters to clear the 700 MHz spectrum prior

to that spectrum being reallocated.

30. The consequence of ignoring the services provided today using the 3500 MHz

spectrum is that Canada risks taking a significant step backwards in its digital strategy.

As the CRTC Annual Monitoring Report indicates, 80% of Canadians are now

connected to the Internet.9 However, if the proposals in the Consultation Paper are

implemented in the areas designated “urban”, that connectivity will drop to 76%,10

which is comparable to where it was in 2009.11 Canada will lose the benefits that the

3500 MHz spectrum has provided. While the proposals would set back connectivity

progress, the impact on availability of access to service is far more dramatic. At the

present time, 84% of rural Canadians have access to high speed Internet. 12 If the

proposals in the Consultation Paper are adopted, that number will drop to less than

9 Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, Communications Monitoring Report Part 2,

2014, page 171, table 5.3.0. 10 Connections derived from the CRTC 2014 Communications Monitoring Report and then reduced by the

500,000 households that would no longer be connected. 11 Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, Communications Monitoring Report, 2011,

page 137, table 5.3.0. 12 Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, Communications Monitoring Report Part 2,

2014, page 171, table 5.3.0.

- 9 -

55% of rural Canadians having high speed Internet available in their area. 13 This

would be a material set back to Canada’s objectives in the Digital Strategy 150.

31. Given the primary purpose of the 3500 MHz spectrum is to provide fixed wireless

access to the Internet, it is odd that the Consultation Paper proposes to fundamentally

alter the use of the spectrum and yet does not address any of these issues.

32. The Consultation Paper also seems at odds with the Digital Strategy 150 program

whereby the Government of Canada is to invest $305 million to extend and enhance

high-speed Internet services with a target speed of 5 Mbps in rural areas. The

spectrum necessary to build out the new fixed wireless networks in many of the rural

areas under this program is to be made mobile under the Consultation Paper. It is

difficult to reconcile how the Government of Canada intends to support the expansion

of rural broadband if it continues to convert spectrum from fixed wireless access use to

mobile services for urban areas.

33. If Industry Canada is to achieve its objective to maximizing the benefits of spectrum

for all Canadians, then in setting new policies for the 3500 MHz band, it must first do

no harm to the significant benefits derived from the fixed wireless Internet access

valued by Canadians today.

34. Xplornet submits that Industry Canada should first undertake the same research on the

need for spectrum to provide fixed Internet connections that it did in the Outlook on

the need for mobile spectrum. Once Industry Canada has that information, it will be

better situated to put forward a plan for how Internet services should be provided to

meet the present and future Internet needs of Canadians. Such a plan is absent from

the Consultation Paper today.

35. Respectfully, Xplornet submits that, in the absence of research and a plan, this

Consultation Paper puts forward proposals that will do harm. The proposals prioritize

future mobile services over existing Internet services and, as a result of the

displacement proposed in section 9.2 of the Consultation Paper, will result in spectrum

13 Rural households of 3.58 million derived from the CRTC 2014 Communications Monitoring Report, table 5.3.0

and then reduced by the 1.16 million rural households within the “urban” designed licences.

- 10 -

that is in use today providing service to over half a million Canadians being taken back

and the Internet services shut off.

36. The Consultation Paper should have first asked if 3500 MHz is being used to achieve

what it was intended to do. It should have considered the good that has been achieved

and how Industry Canada can seek to preserve and build on that good in the future to

increase speed and service to rural Canadians so that they keep pace with urban

Canadians. After that, Industry Canada should ask what more 3500 MHz can do, such

as provide an overflow for mobile services.

37. If Industry Canada had taken this approach to the Consultation Paper, the benefits of

fixed wireless Internet access using the 3500 MHz band would have been set out.

There would have been an acknowledgement that more spectrum is required to meet

the growing fixed Internet needs and to meet the demands for higher speeds and more

throughput in the next five years.

38. In summary, the Consultation Paper fails to assess the fixed Internet needs and fails to

balance those needs against other spectrum needs. If implemented, the Consultation

Paper will punish companies that have expended significant capital to deploy the

intended service by taking away their spectrum and shutting down existing Internet

access service to Canadians. It will foreclose the chance of expansion of those

services as contemplated by the Digital Canada 150 program. In light of all of this,

Xplornet believes the proposals in the Consultation Paper should be rejected and

Industry Canada should seek to find a better implementation approach to its intended

public policy.

- 11 -

ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL

39. Xplornet appreciates that Industry Canada tried to find a solution to the problem of

making spectrum available for better broadband access to Canadians in less densely

populated areas. However, given the flaws with the proposals in the Consultation

Paper, an alternative needs to be found to fix this situation.

40. From a policy perspective, Industry Canada should start with Canadians’ greatest

priority – Internet access.14 The 3500 MHz band should continue to be available to

provide fixed wireless Internet access.

41. Next, do not harm. Whatever changes are proposed, if the spectrum is in use

providing service to Canadians today consistent with the policy objective of providing

Internet access, the spectrum should stay deployed. Do not require displacement by

any licensee that has put the spectrum to use in accordance with the licence terms and

conditions. This will insure that the benefits Canadians derive today from the use of

the 3500 MHz spectrum continue and are not lost. No Canadian should have his or her

Internet service taken away.

42. Next, plan for the future to expand the benefits to all Canadians. Xplornet proposes

that Industry Canada assess the need for fixed wireless Internet access and the

spectrum that will be required to provide those services in the future, just as it did for

mobile services in the Outlook.

43. In addition, Industry Canada should undertake a consultation on the 3500 MHz band

plan. It is premature to consider deploying mobile services in the 3500 MHz band

prior to the US band plan and the equipment eco-system being established. It is also

premature to displace existing services without knowing what other frequencies are

available, what equipment will work in those frequencies and how much spectrum will

be needed to relocate those services. Once a band plan is established and the spectrum

14 A 2011 survey conducted by the Canadian Media Research Consortium (CMRC) and Vision Critical, showed

that 42% of respondents said they would be “least willing to give up” their home internet connection. Some 24% said they would be least willing to give up their television cable subscription, while 17% each would least be willing to say goodbye to their mobile phone or newspaper subscription.

- 12 -

requirements for fixed wireless Internet access determined, then Industry Canada

would be in a position to put forward proposals for the appropriate allocation of

spectrum in the 3500 MHz band, including any potential reallocations and transitions.

44. Given the statements above, it would be likewise premature for Xplornet to put

forward a proposal for that band plan. However, if Industry Canada opts not to

undertake such consultations, Xplornet believes consideration should be given to an

alternative approach using a modified version of the European band plan for the 3500

MHz band.

45. It should be noted that the suggestion for the band plan given below only works if the

spectrum is configured for time-division duplexing (“TDD”) use, regardless of

whether it is fixed or mobile. It is Xplornet’s understanding that the global ecosystem

for LTE in the 3500 MHz band universally recommends TDD. As a result, adopting

this approach would be consistent with global equipment standards.

46. The recent European Communications Office Commission Implementing Decision

(2014/276/EU) has the following outcomes:

(a) it harmonizes 3GPP Bands 42 and 43, which cover 3400 – 3800 MHz, and

(b) it mandates that TDD is the only duplexing mode allowed in order to avoid coexistence issues, and enable global economies of scale for equipment manufacture

47. With that brief technical introduction, Xplornet suggests the following band plan:

3400 3475 3550 3650 3700 3800

48. Xplornet proposes to follow the principle of harmonization of Bands 42 and 43, while

at the same time supporting a North American mobile ecosystem. It is intended to be

illustrative of how transitions in the 3500 MHz band might occur to create

opportunities for all interests. This is not meant as a definitive statement that the

Fixed Wireless Access (FWA)

Mobile (legacy FWA) Fixed Fixed Wireless Access FWA

(future)

- 13 -

spectrum from 3400 MHz to 3800 MHz must be made available. Xplornet appreciates

that further consultation would be required on spectrum outside of the 3475 MHz to

3700 MHz frequency range.

49. Xplornet proposes to take the existing 3500 MHz band and extend it from 3400 to

3800 MHz, to create an additional 175 MHz of spectrum beyond the current 175 MHz.

Within that range, the proposed uses would be:

New 75 MHz (3400 to 3475 MHz) – When such a block becomes available in

the next five years, this would be designated for fixed wireless access to allow

the necessary new spectrum for growth of the networks to accommodate the

higher speeds and more throughput demanded by customers.

3475 MHz to 3550 MHz (original band FWA) – This would remain fixed

wireless access use only, as it is today. Existing providers would be allowed to

continue to operate and expand their networks in this band.

3550 MHz to 3650 MHz (original band mobile) – This spectrum would

transition to mobile use. Any fixed wireless access systems operating today

would be grandfathered and allowed to continue to operate. Ideally, the

proposed location of this 100 MHz within the band would coincide with the

mobile spectrum in the United States band plan to allow for a common mobile

ecosystem with the United States for handsets.

3650 to 3700 MHz – This would continue as it is under the current light

licensed regime for fixed wireless or other uses. It is essentially the grid cell

licensing regime contemplated by the Consultation Paper and could be used

effectively by smaller providers in low density areas to deliver Internet service.

Xplornet is not aware of any evidence that this 50 MHz has been fully utilized

today in the areas designated “rural” in the Consultation Paper.

3700 to 3800 MHz (Replacement/New FWA band) – This would replace the

100 MHz going to mobile in the original band that is currently being used for

- 14 -

fixed wireless access and allow fixed wireless access networks to continue

providing Internet services in the future.15

50. If this plan is adopted, a licensee in the band must decide if it wants to be a fixed

wireless or mobile licensee. The licensee would be free to choose either option but

cannot hold both fixed wireless and mobile spectrum in the 3500 MHz band (i.e. a

licensee cannot have licences in both the 3475 MHz to 3550 MHz range and the 3550

MHz to 3650 MHz range). This does not preclude a licensee from being in both the

fixed wireless Internet business and the mobile business. However, if a licensee

chooses to hold fixed wireless spectrum in the 3500 MHz band, then it must use

spectrum in another band, such as PSC or AWS-1, for its mobile business.

51. To facilitate an orderly transition, existing licences would be encouraged to swap with

other licensees so as to result in fixed licensees holding the 75 MHz of FWA in the

original band and the mobile licensees holding the 100 MHz of the mobile spectrum in

the original band.

52. To the extent a fixed wireless provider using the spectrum is unable to swap into the

75 MHZ of FWA in the original band, that operator would be grandfathered until the

transition to the new 100 MHz of FWA is possible. This preserves the benefits to

Canadians of receiving Internet through the 3500 MHz band until a suitable

replacement spectrum can be found.

53. Once the new 100 MHz of FWA is identified, grandfathered FWA licensees in the 100

MHz mobile band would be encouraged to transition. Industry Canada should provide

a two year period for that transition, which would be consistent with prior reallocation

transition periods in other spectrum in rural areas, such as the AWS spectrum.16 This

would clear the mobile spectrum for re-auction. In the event that moving to the 100

MHz of FWA in the new band would require additional capital investment or if

15 Report ITU-R S.2199, “Studies on compatibility of broadband wireless access systems and fixed-satellite

service networks in the 3 400-4 200 MHz band”, November 2010. 16 Consultation on a Framework to Auction Spectrum in the 2 GHz Range including Advanced Wireless

Services, Feb, 2007, http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf08760.html#t3.

- 15 -

Industry Canada wanted the mobile spectrum cleared more quickly, Industry Canada

could offer 2 MHz for 1 MHz. For example, exiting 25 MHz in the original band

mobile spectrum would result in a licensee receiving 50 MHz in the new FWA band.

54. The new FWA band would have strict deployment conditions requiring use within two

years. If the licensee is moving from the original band and was in compliance with its

licence in the original band, the deployment requirement could be as short as 6

months, assuming no equipment changes are required.

55. All FWA licences would have a requirement to continuously maintain compliance

with the licence conditions throughout the term to insure licensees do not try to take

advantage of the 2 MHz for 1 MHz inducement and then cease to use the spectrum for

the benefit of Canadians.

56. With respect to the mobile spectrum in the original band, existing licensees who opt to

be mobile licensees would be entitled to convert their licences from FWA to mobile,

provided 50% of the licensed spectrum is returned to Industry Canada. For example,

if a licensee had 50 MHz in the original band of mobile spectrum, it could retain 25

MHz of spectrum that would now be usable for mobile if that licensee returned 25

MHz to Industry Canada for re-auction.

57. Industry Canada would then have 50 MHz of mobile spectrum available in each Tier 4

licence to be auctioned. Consistent with the approach advocated by TELUS in the

AWS-3 Consultation,17 Xplornet would suggest that Industry Canada consider a cap in

this new mobile band of 25 MHz of spectrum per mobile provider. This would insure

that at least four mobile providers would have access to the spectrum in each Tier 4

area, thereby creating a level playing field for the four competitive mobile services

that the Government of Canada wishes to encourage.

58. This “give back” of spectrum would be consistent with prior policies of Industry

Canada upon a change in use. It may be argued that the return of spectrum should

17 Consultation on the Technical Policy and Licensing Framework for Advanced Wireless Services in the Bands

1755-1780 MHz and 2155-2180 MHz, SLPB-004-14, dated July 28, 2014, comments of TELUS Communications Company, July 4, 2014, para. 49.

- 16 -

only be one-third, such as was the case for the 2500 MHz spectrum. However, this

only works when the spectrum breaks easily into small paired blocks. It makes more

sense to give back one half of the existing 50 MHz blocks (i.e. 25 MHz) in order to

convert spectrum to a mobile application.

59. It is paramount that Canada not lose the benefits it has today. As a result, any

spectrum lost from fixed wireless use to mobile, must be replaced within the operating

range of existing fixed wireless network and consumer premise equipment. This

proposal only works if there is a transition spectrum available to accommodate fixed

wireless access services.

60. There may be some parties who suggest that leaving a fixed wireless access band in

the 3475 MHz to 3550 MHz block in urban areas wastes the spectrum because it will

not be used for Internet access services. Xplornet does not agree with that view. As

Industry Canada knows from the input received in the 2012 Consultation Paper on

3500 MHz spectrum, there are many low density areas within the urban licences that

need fixed wireless Internet service but cannot receive it today because the spectrum is

not in use for its intended purpose.18 There are also businesses that rely on fixed

wireless access Internet service as a primary or secondary system within higher

density population areas. As an example, TerraGo has for years attempted to seek

spectrum for its fixed wireless access service for businesses in metropolitan areas but

has been unable to obtain it.

61. As noted above, Xplornet is highly supportive of use requirements continuing to be a

condition of all spectrum licences, including those in a new 3500 MHz band. It is

fundamental that such use requirements be part of the licensing regime for the 3500

MHz band to ensure consistency with Industry Canada’s policy objective of “use it or

lose it”. This will prevent hoarding or speculating in spectrum and will insure the

spectrum is being put to its intended use for the benefit of Canadians. In the event

18 Please see the submissions of Grey County, King Township, Oxford County, The Regional Municipality of Durham and The Regional Municipality of Halton available at: http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf10589.html.

- 17 -

fixed wireless access only spectrum is not being used, the Government of Canada will

have the ability to take it back. Should the unlikely situation arise that there is no

potential fixed wireless access use, Industry Canada would then be in a position to

reallocate such spectrum to mobile and auction or sell such spectrum, if that would be

the best use for the spectrum in the relevant license area.

62. For these reasons, Xplornet submits the spectrum in the pure fixed wireless access

range will not go unused but rather will finally be used for its intended purpose.

63. Xplornet recognizes that this proposal is not perfect. However, it is respectfully

submits that this proposal achieves the primary objectives of:

(a) insuring that spectrum is put to use in a manner that properly and equitably

balances the needs in an inclusive way for the benefit of all Canadians,

regardless of where they live, instead of focusing unduly on urban mobile

customers,

(b) insuring spectrum does not continue to go unused (i.e. the “use it or lose

it” principle is respected),

(c) preserving the existing benefits flowing today from the use of spectrum to

provide fixed wireless Internet service to rural Canadians,

(d) providing for the future growth of fixed wireless Internet service in rural

Canada,

(e) making available an additional 50 MHz or more of mobile spectrum for

providers that do not currently have access to the 3500 MHz band, and

(f) making 50 MHz of spectrum available to mobile providers currently

providing service in Tier 4 areas.

64. In short, the spectrum is shared to ensure primary fixed Internet access can meet the

current and future need of Canadians, mobile spectrum is available if needed, and not

a megahertz of spectrum will go unused.

- 18 -

65. In formulating a policy for the 3500 MHz band, Xplornet believes that Industry

Canada must first “do no harm” by preserving the good that has been achieved over

the last decade to bring rural Internet access opportunities to Canadians, and then

second seek to make changes that incrementally improve the benefits for all

Canadians, urban and rural, that are received from the use of spectrum.

66. To that end, Xplornet believes that by adopting the proposal above, Industry Canada

can achieve its objective to maximize the benefits of spectrum for Canadians, can

insure that spectrum is put to work as efficiently as possible instead of being left idle

and can balance of needs of all providers.

67. Xplornet does not support the proposals put forward in the Consultation Paper because

they fail to preserve the benefits Canadians enjoy today as a result of the use of 3500

MHz spectrum and fail to provide for any anticipated future needs. In addition to the

general comments above, Xplornet has provided below specific comments in response

to the questions posed in the Consultation Paper.

COMMENTS ON SPECIFIC ISSUES RAISED BY THE DEPARTMENT

Proposed New Classification of Tier 4 Service Areas — Rural vs. Urban

1. Industry Canada invites comments on its proposal to classify Tier 4 service areas as either

urban or rural for the band 3475-3650 MHz, using Statistics Canada’s 2011 definition for

population centres, as outlined in Annex A.

68. At the outset, Xplornet would like to thank Industry Canada for trying to address the

issue of rural broadband. This is an issue that Xplornet has supported for many years.

However, Xplornet would like to point out that calling something “urban” does not

make it urban. Over 80% of the geographic area called “urban” in the Consultation

Paper is, in fact, rural and home to more than 50% of what Statistic Canada considers

rural Canadians.

- 19 -

69. Xplornet has long noted that the large geographic areas within the Tier 4 licence areas

include higher density population areas and low density population areas. While the

higher density areas may have 80% of the population within the Tier 4, the 20% of the

population in the lower density areas occupy approximately 80% of the geographic

area within a Tier 4 licence area. 19 The net result is that low density (rural) areas are

trapped within the same licence as high density (urban) areas and the spectrum in

those low density areas ends up going unused. Xplornet has advocated separating out

the low density from the high density areas within certain licences.

70. Xplornet has not advocated for the proposal put forward by Industry Canada. The

proposal in the Consultation Paper exacerbates the very problem that exists today by

extending the arbitrary definition of “urban”.

71. The problem today is that low density areas are trapped within licensed areas with

high density areas. The market has naturally identified these problematic Tier 4

licence areas. They are the 7 biggest cities in Canada (Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver,

Ottawa, Calgary, Edmonton and Quebec City). Each of these Tier 4 licence areas has

a population of 780,000 or more.

72. It is very difficult economically to justify purchasing spectrum, that is priced on a

MHzPOP (megahertz x population) basis, for servicing the 20% of the population in

the low density areas if you have to pay for the other 80% of the population in the high

density areas.

19 As examples, please see the following Tier 4 licence areas comparisons of population and geographic area.

Population Area (Sq. km)

Urban Rural Urban Rural

Calgary (4-136) 92% 8% 4% 96%

Quebec City (4-030) 81% 19% 6% 94%

Windsor (4-090) 62% 38% 11% 89%

Toronto (4-077) 94% 6% 32% 68%

- 20 -

73. Instead of addressing the rural areas trapped in the Tier 4 licences that contain large

metropolitan areas, the Consultation Paper extends the issue to another 54 Tier 4

regions that are not an issue today.

74. The proposed definition of “urban” includes anything with a population centre over

30,000 people. This makes 61 licence areas “urban”. As a result, not only would the

rural areas trapped in the big city licences (such as Milton, Uxbridge and Halton in the

Toronto licence and Olds, Banff and Cochrane in the Calgary licence) be cut off from

the possibility of fixed wireless Internet services but, under the proposal, areas such as

Chatham Ontario, Joliette Quebec, Grand Prairie Alberta and Woodstock New

Brunswick20 suddenly become “urban” and lose their existing fixed wireless service.

75. Where there were once seven Tier 4 licence areas that were problematic because of the

original definitions and market forces, there are now 61 areas that have become

problematic because of the proposed new rules declaring them “urban”. This is the

very definition of doing harm.

76. In analyzing the methodology used, it appears Industry Canada only needed to find

two to four grid cells that had more than 10,000 people within them to classify the

entire Tier 4 area as “urban”. The average Tier 4 licence area (ignoring the large areas

in the northern territories) has 240 grid cells within its boundaries. It seems counter-

intuitive to conclude that because a few grid cells within a Tier 4 licence area have

urban densities, the entire Tier 4 area should be “urban”. It allows the characteristics

of less than 10% of the cells to determine the classification of all the cells in the Tier 4

area. It is like suggesting that because a lake occupies 50 km2, a 6,000 km2 area

should be considered under water. It is more reasonable to conclude that the

characteristic of the majority of the cells should characterize the Tier 4 area. Using

that logic, only two or three of the Tier 4 licences would be “urban” and those areas

are the ones identified in the Outlook as metropolitan areas.

20 Woodstock, New Brunswick is the home of Xplornet. We are quite certain that with a population of 5,200

located 100 km from the nearest urban area (Fredericton), it is not “urban”.

- 21 -

77. To summarize the effect of the urban/rural classification process, according to

Statistics Canada census block data, 50% of all Canadians that live in uncabled areas

(i.e. areas that do not have any cable or wired access that can provide 5 Mbps or higher

speeds) would now be designated as “urban” and, under the proposal, there would be

no spectrum to provide Internet access available. That is 1.16 million Canadian

households outside of wireline technology’s reach that are suddenly considered

“urban” and have no spectrum available to provide fixed wireless Internet access.

78. Based on available tower data, the spectrum associated with those towers and our

knowledge of the market, it would be a conservative estimate that over a quarter of a

million Canadians would have their existing fixed wireless Internet service shut off if

this proposal from the Consultation Paper is adopted.

79. These numbers can be verified by Industry Canada who has received detailed

spectrum use data from all of the licensees in the 3500 MHz band. Industry Canada

has the maps of where every tower is located and can confirm there are hundreds (if

not thousands) of broadcast sites providing service today in areas that are proposed to

be designated “urban” and consequently would be subject to displacement of the

spectrum deployed.

80. Shutting off Internet services represents a loss of benefits to Canadians. There is no

off-setting gain from making that spectrum mobile because there is no pressing need

for it to be mobile. In paragraph 23 of the Consultation Paper, Industry Canada states

that “[t]he Department is now of the view that medium urban, as well as large urban

tiers, will see demand for mobile services.” As discussed above, there is no supporting

evidence for this statement.

81. The Department’s own report, the Outlook, states in the first paragraph of Annex A:

“The peak demand for spectrum is in the large metropolitan areas (such as areas

including Greater Toronto, Vancouver, Montréal, etc.). Therefore, the forecasting for

spectrum use must be focused in these areas of high demand.”21

21 Outlook, page 50.

- 22 -

82. Even the experts on which Industry Canada is relying, believe the demand issue is in a

few large metropolitan areas. Consequently, there is no support in the Outlook for

Industry Canada concluding that the other 54 licensed areas need to be designated

“urban” and receive additional mobile spectrum, particularly given the vast majority of

the grid cells within those Tier 4 areas are rural densities.

83. To expropriate licensed spectrum that is being used in accordance with its licence

terms and conditions for the benefit of over 250,000 Canadians today on the basis of a

“view” without supporting evidence of an overriding policy need, is without precedent

and represents poor public policy.

84. Xplornet supports trying to insure spectrum is not marooned in urban licences.

However, Xplornet will not support an implementation proposal such as the one in the

Consultation Paper that designates half of all rural Canadians as “urban” and gives no

consideration to the actual population densities within the majority of grid cells in each

of the licensed areas.

85. While we appreciate the attempt to consider rural in this Consultation, for these

reasons, Xplornet believes the proposed classifications of the Tier 4 service areas as

either “urban” or “rural” is fundamentally flawed and would, if implemented, cause

tremendous harm to the availability of Internet services.

2. Industry Canada invites comments on its proposal to make available spectrum licences in

tier areas classified as rural, through a first-come, first-served process.

86. Xplornet believes Industry Canada should determine a band plan before embarking on

a process of licensing spectrum. Further, from the Consultation Paper, it is unclear

what duration such FCFS licences would be.

87. Without the band plan and the ability to issue a licence for a term greater than one

year, such FCFS licences would be of little value because a return on investment

cannot be achieved on the capital invested within one year.

- 23 -

88. As a general policy matter, Xplornet is supportive of issuing licences for Tier 4 areas

not currently licensed on a first come first serve basis, provided the applicant submits

to Industry Canada a sufficiently detailed proposal regarding planned deployment of

the spectrum that would cover the requisite population level set for that Tier 4 licence

area. Such a proposal would not need to result in full coverage to meet the licence use

criteria immediately but should provide for a phased approach that meets the

requirement within the time stipulated in the terms of the spectrum licence.

89. Xplornet would suggest two years is an appropriate time frame to meet the deployment

requirements. The Consultation Paper suggests as little as six months but that time

frame is too short to fulfill the tower consultation process that is now in place for new

tower locations.22

90. If such an approach is taken, it should be a condition of that licence that if a licensee

fails to meet its deployment requirements, the licence can be revoked by Industry

Canada. Provided the time for deployment is reasonable, having regard to organic

growth rates in a business and the ability to generate capital to expand a business, but

not excessive such that the spectrum could sit unused for years, this proposal would

allow for providers to obtain licences on a first-come first serve basis to support their

Internet access business.

91. In offering the above comments, Xplornet has assumed the FCFS licences are for full

Tier 4 licence areas. Xplornet does not support licensing at the grid cell level, on a

FCFS basis or otherwise, for the 3500 MHz band.

22 The procedure under Industry Canada’s Radiocommunication and Broadcasting Antenna Systems, CPC-2-0-03,

July 15, 2014, is anticipated to take 120 days but is typically longer. Further, this process starts after a suitable location is found.

- 24 -

3. Industry Canada invites comments on these licences being issued as annual spectrum

licences, defined on a per grid-cell basis and authorized only for the amount of spectrum

required to operate (refer to Section 7.3).

92. For all the reasons given by the parties participating in the 2012 Consultation Paper,

licensing low density areas in “rural” designated licence areas on a grid cell basis

remains impractical and inefficient.

93. Xplornet does not support the idea of licensing the rural tiers (or any tiers) on a per

grid-cell basis and authorizing only the amount of spectrum required to operate. This

represents micromanagement of an Internet service business and places Industry

Canada in a difficult position of second guessing the business and engineering

decisions of the market place.

94. Further, as indicated in Xplornet’s response of December 17, 2012 to this proposal that

was included in the Consultation on Renewal Process for 2300 MHz and 3500 MHz,

DGSO-006-12, October 2012, licensing at the grid cell level is discriminatory against

rural carriers.

95. It is discriminatory because it unfairly treats rural providers differently from urban

providers. An urban carrier can satisfy its condition of licence by only deploying in an

urban part of its Tier 4 licence area. In such a case, the provider might have no rural

deployment but will get to keep the unused rural spectrum because the condition of

licence has been met.

96. In comparison, a rural provider that deploys extensively in rural areas may satisfy the

same deployment condition (as a percentage of population in the licence area) and yet

may have grid cells of population, for which the licensee may have paid to purchase as

part of the licence price, taken back and given to another provider.

97. There is a lack of symmetry in the outcome for urban and rural providers when a

portion of a licence goes unused. This policy proposal discriminates against rural

providers and yet continues to allow urban providers to leave unused rural spectrum

- 25 -

lying fallow in the problematic urban licences. This is inconsistent with Industry

Canada’s policy to encourage rural investment and rural deployment.

98. This proposal also penalizes providers that choose to operate and deploy in less

densely populated areas because it ignores the fact that rural providers are required to

pay for all of the spectrum in their Tier 4 licence areas when they participated in the

3500 MHz auction or purchased the licences from other providers.

99. The possibility that parts of a licence for which a rural licensee has paid could be taken

away, makes it that much more difficult to raise capital to purchase licences. It is

already difficult to raise money for rural fixed wireless deployments because of the

business risks. If a licensee now faces the possibility of losing part of the licence for

which is has paid, it will make it that much more difficult, if not potentially

impossible, to raise money for rural development.

100. From a practical perspective, Xplornet would also submit that licensing at a grid cell

level is very challenging. Having voluntarily entered into an arrangement that resulted

in Xplornet becoming a licensee of grid cells within several Tier 4 areas, Xplornet can

speak from experience. Such an arrangement prevents organic growth of a business

because it does not allow for expansion and growth in immediately adjacent areas.

101. When licensing at the grid cell level, managing interference is challenging. The grid

cells are approximately 4.4 km across and yet the typical service area of a broadcast

location is 30 km and the radios are capable of transmitting 100 km. It requires

extreme effort to contain the signal in the grid cell and yet still have sufficient power

to serve customers. Industry Canada would, inevitably, end up arbitrating many

inference claims between licensees.

102. To avoid interference, there needs to be a buffer zone or a requirement to adjust power

levels such that deployment becomes impractical for rural population densities. If

Industry Canada is licensing at the grid cell level, this naturally creates wasted

spectrum in the “no man’s land” between the licensed grid cell areas to prevent

interference. This will lead to groups of Canadians who are extremely frustrated that

- 26 -

they will be able to see towers from each provider and yet will not be able to receive

service from either because they are in the buffer zones.

103. There are also the games that could be played between competitors. One need only

look at the unlicensed spectrum to see what would happen. In the unlicensed 900

MHz and 2400 MHz spectrum, a rival service provider will attempt to “ring” a

successful tower of a competitor. This is the act of deploying towers, often smaller

ones, in a circle around a successful tower of a competitor to raise the “noise floor”

and reduce the service area of the successful tower. It effectively allows the ringer to

intercept the customers that are outside of the ringed area. If spectrum can be carved

out of a licence at a grid cell level, competitors could attempt to ring a successful

provider and intercept customers to prevent expansion of the originally licensed

provider.

104. If Industry Canada wants a policy that is equitable to both rural and urban carriers, it

must treat licensees the same and accord them the same rights to their licensed areas.

If Industry Canada believes splitting the large urban licences is not appropriate, even

though spectrum in low density areas goes unused, then the same reasoning must be

applied fairly and equality in the rural setting to prevent licensees from losing grid-

cells from within their licence areas.

105. Finally, Xplornet submits that there is already essentially grid cell licensing available

in the 3.65 MHz spectrum band. While this spectrum has been oversubscribed in

urban and near urban areas, Xplornet is not aware of any pressing need for more

spectrum beyond the current 50 MHz in the areas to be designated “rural” in the

Consultation Paper.

106. For these reasons, Xplornet believes the proposal to take back grid cells from licensed

rural areas is poor policy, would result in less efficient use of spectrum, create more

interference issues and degrade the quality of service for consumers.

- 27 -

Treatment of Incumbents in Rural Tier Areas

4. Industry Canada invites comments on its proposal to modify the current notification period

for existing point-to-point, fixed stations such that those affecting the implementation of new

FWA systems in rural Tier 4 areas would now be afforded a notification period of six months.

107. In the absence of a band plan, it is difficult to comment on the appropriateness of the

above proposal. Based on available information, Xplornet believes this proposal is

reasonable.

5. Industry Canada invites comments on its proposal to have the transition policy described in

section 4 of Annex B apply to all FWA systems (i.e. existing FCFS and auctioned FWA systems

as listed in (v) and (vi)) within rural tiers.

108. Xplornet does not understand why the Consultation Paper appears to propose that

“rural” Tier 4 areas that are to remain fixed wireless deployment areas would be

subject to a transition policy to mobile, as described in section 4 of Annex B.

109. Xplornet objects to the proposal to have the transition policy described in section 4 of

Annex B apply to all FWA systems within rural tiers.

110. It makes no sense because section 4 of Annex B reads: “Licences may be subject to a

transition to a new band plan and other relevant technical rules, if and when they are

established to facilitate the introduction of commercial mobile services in urban tiers.”

[emphasis added] It is unclear why the rural tiers would be subject to a transition plan

that speaks specifically to commercial mobile services in urban tiers.

111. It appears counter to the Consultation Paper to suggest that rural tiers should transition

to commercial mobile services when there is no pressing need for spectrum and the

Consultation Paper contemplates rural tiers continuing to use 3500 MHz spectrum for

fixed wireless deployments.

- 28 -

112. Further, why would any company make the capital investment to build out new

infrastructure knowing that with as little as 6 months warning,23 the spectrum could be

transitioned to mobile and the company forced to shut down its fixed wireless services

because it is losing the spectrum needed to provide those services?

113. This proposal seems at odds with all of the Government of Canada’s statements

regarding improving connectivity for Canadians throughout the country, especially in

rural and remote areas. By adding a provision to the licences that allows the spectrum

being used for the deployment of fixed wireless services in truly rural (if not remote)

areas to be taken away and made mobile discourages the very investment and

expansion the Government so desperately seeks. This would appear to be counter-

intuitive and inconsistent with public policy objectives.

114. If Industry Canada truly intends to transition rural tier spectrum to mobile use, then

this begs the question of what spectrum is left to be used to provide fixed wireless

Internet services in low population density areas (including those in supposedly

“urban” tiers)? What technology does Industry Canada propose be used in place of

fixed wireless access?

115. In any event, it is premature to assess transition plans when Industry Canada has not

determined a band plan. Xplornet respectfully suggests waiting until after the band

plan is established before assessing what, if any, transition is required and in what time

frame.

FWA Band Plan in Rural Areas

116. Industry Canada did not ask for comments on the proposed FWA Band Plan in Rural

Areas. However, the Consultation Paper statements warrant comment. Xplornet

suggests that Industry Canada should first consult on a new band plan before

undertaking a reallocation of the band.

23 Consultation Paper, para. 37.

- 29 -

117. Xplornet agrees that the current band plan should remain in place at this time. Should

Industry Canada consider a new plan, Xplornet would suggest the plan put forward in

paragraphs 44 to 66 above.

118. For the reasons discussed above, Xplornet does not support the grid-cell spectrum

licence proposal. Further, the idea of 5+5 MHz paired spectrum in a grid-cell for

“rural” is unworkable. This is essentially an FDD type cellular telephone spectrum

allocation that will not support fixed wireless deployment, nor take advantage of

current and future technology advancements. For example, the 3GPP LTE equipment

uses 10 MHz or 20 MHz channels. As a result, a minimum of 10 MHz would be

required for a fixed wireless deployment.

119. The reason the 3500 MHz band has been successfully used for Internet access to date

is because it is 25 MHz blocks of TDD configured spectrum. This allows channels of

10 MHz or 20 MHz. These large channels permit the delivery of the higher speeds

and greater data throughput demanded by consumers of their fixed Internet

connection.

120. For these reasons, Xplornet believes Industry Canada should not be considering

applying mobile architecture with small channels to the 3500 MHz band.

Proposed Conditions of Licence for Existing and New FCFS FWA Licences

6. Industry Canada invites comments on the conditions of licence in Annex B.

121. Imposing new licence terms prior to determining the band plan is premature. It is

difficult to assess the conditions without addressing the use issues. Further, it seems

odd to be imposing new conditions on what are essentially temporary rolling one year

licences.

122. In general, Xplornet is supportive of the licence terms in Annex B, except as discussed

below in respect of the licence term and the licence fees. With respect to the time for

deployment, Xplornet suggests a modification to avoid accidentally increasing the

time for compliance.

- 30 -

123. With respect to the licence term, one year is too short a time horizon for capital

investments if there is no expectation of renewal. Industry Canada is not offering a

firm timeframe for when a band plan will be established. The licensee faces a difficult

situation where it must invest to deploy the spectrum or risk losing the licence, and yet

even if the investment is made, the spectrum and all of that investment could be wiped

out by the cancellation of the spectrum licence in one of the 61 “urban” areas.

124. None of this furthers the primary objective of encouraging deployment of networks to

serve Canadians. Industry Canada needs to fix a time around this process.

125. With respect to annual licence fees, if Industry Canada confirms that legacy use will

be grandfathered, then Xplornet believes it is reasonable to continue to charge annual

fees for the use of the spectrum. Absent that confirmation, it seems unfair to insist on

annual fees when displacement could be as short as six months under the Consultation

Paper proposals.

126. As indicated in the comments above and in the response to question 9 below, Xplornet

strongly disagrees with the provisions pertaining to displacement.

127. If these licence terms are to be imposed immediately on all licences, whether such

licences are the original licences that have not reached the end of their 10 year term, or

renewed licences that have a one year term, then Xplornet suggests that the first

sentence in section 10 should require deployment to be completed by the earlier of the

date provided in the original licence (i.e. if the licence is to expire in April 2015,

deployment is required to have occurred by April 2015) or six months after the

issuance of this licence. If not, this clause could have the effect of extending

deployment requirements beyond the current deadlines.

128. Xplornet is supportive of the requirement to maintain ongoing service delivery since

that insures the benefits of the spectrum continue to be received by Canadians

throughout the term of the spectrum licence.

- 31 -

Proposed Fundamental Reallocation of the 3500 MHz Band

7. Industry Canada invites comments on its proposal to fundamentally reallocate the 3500 MHz

band (3475-3650 MHz) to include mobile services and its proposed changes to the Canadian

Table of Frequency Allocations as found in Annex C.

129. Xplornet does not support the proposal to fundamentally reallocate the 3500 MHz

band to include mobile services without first assessing the need for spectrum to

provide fixed wireless services and undertaking a consultation on a new band plan.

Xplornet believes that the proposal in the Consultation Paper fails to balance the needs

of all Canadians and instead pursues only one policy – the expansion of mobile

services – to the exclusions of all other legitimate uses for spectrum that benefit

Canadians.

130. Although including mobile services sounds innocuous, such a change is not when

coupled with the displacement provisions. It results in a fundamental reallocation that

causes more harm than it provides benefit to Canadians.

131. In the Consultation Paper, Industry Canada “recognizes that sufficient and appropriate

spectrum resources must be available to commercial mobile service providers to

ensure that Canadians continue to benefit from advanced wireless services.”24 Further,

it is stated that:

“Frequency allocations are an important first step in developing spectrum utilization policies that foster the implementation of new radiocommunication services. Modifications to the Canadian Table of Frequency Allocations are intended to reflect the public interest in introducing new wireless services that benefit Canadians and respond to marketplace demands. In order to establish the necessary spectrum management environment to meet the growing demand for commercial mobile broadband services, the Department proposes to fundamentally reallocate the 3500 MHz band to include the Mobile Service in the Canadian Table of Frequency Allocations.”25

24 Consultation Paper, para. 49. 25 Consultation Paper, para. 50.

- 32 -

132. In addition, the Consultation Paper includes references to the Outlook as support for

the proposition that more spectrum is required for mobile applications.26 As noted

above, Xplornet does not agree with that assessment and believes there are

fundamental flaws in the Outlook. However, Industry Canada has an unwavering

view that more spectrum is needed for mobile applications.

133. What spectrum does Industry Canada believe will be used to provide fixed wireless

Internet access to Canadians living in medium to low density population areas?

134. In its haste to make the 3500 MHz band mobile, Industry Canada has not done a

consultation on the band plan or assessed the availability of mobile equipment in the

3500 MHz frequency, which is still several years from market. It also failed to do any

form of assessment of how much spectrum is required for fixed wireless Internet

access or what the consequences would be of displacing fixed wireless access

networks from the 3500 MHz band.

135. As a matter of public policy, the Government of Canada has an obligation to consider

the needs of all Canadians and, in this case, the needs of over half the Canadians in

rural areas have not only been ignore but completely excluded from the discussion.

136. A reclassification of this nature has consequences that have not been considered by

Industry Canada. It is remarkable that a Consultation Paper would propose what is

characterized as “a fundamental reallocation”27 of such a nature that “current licensees

would no longer have an expectation of renewal and would be subject to

displacement” without a single word in the Consultation Paper on the current fixed

wireless access use of the spectrum band or how fixed wireless access needs would be

met once the band was made mobile.

137. Xplornet supports the proposal that fixed service systems should be allowed to

continue to operate, as set out in paragraph 55 of the Consultation Paper. However,

Xplornet does not agree with the additional condition that the displacement proposal

should also apply. If the spectrum is in use for a fixed wireless system today, it should 26 Consultation Paper, paragraphs 17 and 53. 27 Consultation Paper, para. 52.

- 33 -

not be displaced for a future mobile system without an alternative spectrum being

made available.

138. Given the benefits provided to Canadians today through the use of the 3500 MHz for

fixed wireless Internet access, it is incumbent upon Industry Canada to allow those

services to continue to serve Canadians. A fundamental reallocated, as proposed in the

Consultation Paper, without an assessment of the fixed wireless use of the spectrum

today is poor public policy and likely will result in the loss of the connectivity benefits

Canada has achieved through the deployment of the 3500 MHz spectrum.

8. Industry Canada invites comments on its geographically differentiated policy where mobile

services will be allowed in urban tiers, and fixed services will be allowed in rural tiers (refer to

Section 6 for the definition of urban and rural tiers).

139. Xplornet does not support the proposal to geographically differentiate the spectrum

such that mobile services are allowed in urban tiers and fixed services are allowed in

rural tiers.

140. It could prove technically challenging to manage the use of the spectrum for mobile

and fixed services in adjacent Tier 4 licence areas. There is a high likelihood of

interference. However, if the spectrum is deployed as TDD, the requirements for

geographic separation no longer exist and it becomes possible to engage in effective

synchronization and coordination.

141. Further, as indicated above, Xplornet believes that the proposal put forward on how to

divide urban and rural areas is fundamentally flawed and only serves to make a bad

situation in a few urban areas that much worse by extending it to 61 Tier 4 licence

areas and eliminating the potential for fast, affordable broadband to 50% of all

Canadians living in truly rural (low density) areas of the country.

142. Based on the Outlook, the supposed need for spectrum will be in Toronto, Vancouver

and Montreal. There is nothing to support the position that all 61 Tier 4 areas to be

designated “urban” need more mobile spectrum.

- 34 -

143. In contrast, 50% of all rural Canadians – people who live in areas where there are no

wires capable of providing 5 Mbps Internet service28 and where the population density

is less than 25 people per square kilometer – live within the 61 Tier 4 licence areas to

be designated as “urban”. If the geographically differentiated proposal is implemented

and the displacement implemented, over half a million Canadians would lose their

existing fixed wireless Internet service.

144. Xplornet respectfully submits that designating “urban” Tier 4 areas for mobile use and

“rural” Tier 4 areas for fixed wireless use does not improve telecommunications

services for anyone given there is not even a mobile eco-system for the 3500 MHz

band today but it will, in fact, take away the service rural Canadians have today.

Options for Displacement

Option 1 – Displacement of existing licensees in urban tiers within a minimum of one year of the release of a future new licensing framework and 3500 MHz band plan. Option 2 – Displacement of existing licensees in urban tiers only if, and as required, after commercial mobile licences are issued. Licensees would have one year to transition once notified by the Department. 9. Industry Canada invites comments on its two proposed options for displacement.

145. As indicated above, Xplornet believes that it is premature to consider displacement

options before a band plan has been determined. Further, without a proposal setting

out to which frequency the existing operating fixed wireless access networks are to

displaced, it is difficult to assess the time and cost associated with each of the

proposed displacement options.

146. As indicated above, Xplornet does not support the concept of geographically splitting

the 3500 MHZ band into urban and rural tiers. Further Xplornet does not support

displacing any licensee using the spectrum for its current licensed purpose of

28 These Canadians are living in areas that do not have digital cable service and would, at best, potentially be able

to receive service from lower speed Asymmetric Digital Subscriber Line (ADSL) services.

- 35 -

providing Internet access services. Consequently, both options proposed are

unacceptable.  

147. These alternatives run counter to everything the Government of Canada has said about

“use it or lose it”. Instead, these alternatives both represent “use it and lose it”.

148. Each 3500 MHz spectrum licence issued to Xplornet contains the following statement

in section 1:

“This licence will expire on the date indicated above, with an expectation to renew licences for subsequent ten-year terms unless a breach of licence condition occurs (e.g. failure to meet a reasonable level of service or implementation requirements as outlined in Section 6.13 of the Policy and Licensing Procedures for the Auction of Spectrum Licences in the 2300 MHz and 3500 MHz Frequency Bands; a fundamental reallocation of spectrum to a new service is required (e.g. a change in international allocation); or, an overriding policy need arises (e.g. a spectrum reallocation to address a national security issue).”

149. Consequently, it is surprising that Industry Canada has put forward in the Consultation

Paper proposals that would terminate the spectrum licences of licensees like Xplornet,

who have fulfilled every element of their licence conditions and are providing the

exact service – reliable and affordable fixed wireless access Internet services – that the

Government of Canada said was its objective when the band was first licensed.29

150. There has been no breach of licence conditions. No overriding policy need has arisen.

Therefore, Industry Canada must put forward proof that a fundamental reallocation of

the spectrum to a new service is required.

151. There is no demonstrated need that a new service is required. As discussed above, the

Consultation Paper merely makes generalized statements regarding mobile wireless

29 SP 3400-3700 MHz — Spectrum Policy and Licensing Provisions for Fixed Wireless Access Systems in Rural

Areas in the Frequency Range 3400-3700 MHz, July 1998, para 3.1 reads: “One of the challenges facing telecommunication service providers and government is to address the growing disparity between urban and rural telephony/data services.”

Policy and Licensing Procedures for the Auction of Spectrum Licences in the 2300 MHz and 3500 MHz Bands, September 2003, page i: “The objective of this licensing process is to provide access to spectrum in the 2300 MHz and 3500 MHz bands to facilitate the implementation of new and innovative wireless services in urban and rural areas” and page 3, section 3.1 said the first objective was to: “to render reliable and affordable telecommunications services of high quality accessible to Canadians in both urban and rural areas in all regions of Canada.”

- 36 -

demand in “urban” areas that have not been supported by any engineering or spectrum

utilization reports. Yet Industry Canada proposes to designate areas inhabited by

approximately 50% of Canada’s rural population as “urban” and force Internet service

providers in those rural areas to shut down service to over half a million Canadians.

152. It is respectfully submitted that makes no sense at all from any policy perspective and

fundamentally breaches equitable doctrines regarding expropriation of property. The

Government of Canada can and must do better from a policy and justice perspective

for the sake of Canadians.

153. Xplornet does not believe there has been sufficient evidence put forward to establish

the need for mobile spectrum is so overpowering that it warrants removing spectrum

from its deployed use of providing the Internet service to Canadians.

154. Xplornet would also submit that Industry Canada has failed to engage in a proper

review of the need for spectrum to provide fixed wireless Internet access and therefore

is not in a position to put forward a displacement proposal that ensures the rights and

benefits of Canadians impacted are appropriately addressed. For example, Industry

Canada has simply assumed there is no impact to removing Internet access for

Canadians.

155. While Industry Canada contemplates legal claims that may arise from service

providers in the Consultation Paper, it completely ignores the implications for

Canadian users of the services and the claims of the many municipalities and

provinces that have invested millions of dollars of public money to assist in the

development of fixed wireless Internet infrastructure that will be shut down if the

licensees are displaced.30

156. Neither displacement option addresses what happens to the fixed wireless Internet

services being provided today. Both proposals just contemplate taking spectrum away

with no route to a replacement spectrum.

30 Based on publicly available documents, it appears at least $12.6 million in public funding has been provided for

fixed wireless networks with “urban” spectrum through the Broadband Canada program, the Eastern Ontario Wardens Caucus program and the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs program.

- 37 -

157. Further, both options let the mobile agenda and timetable dictate when fixed wireless

use will end. This fails to acknowledge that there is independent value arising from

fixed wireless Internet access use that should not go away based on timing of mobile

events.

158. Xplornet proposes that Industry Canada defer any displacement plan until such time as

Industry Canada can provide a replacement spectrum within the band range that can be

serviced by existing equipment that is deployed to provide fixed wireless Internet

services today.

159. Absent any changes by Industry Canada, Xplornet believes option 2 is the lesser of

two evils because it likely will allows operating systems to continue to provide service

to customers for a longer period of time that option 1.

160. Regardless of the choice, both proposals will have the effect of freezing development

of networks in the "urban" designated tiers. Since an adequate return cannot be

achieved in one year, no rational investor will expand or upgrade service in the

designated areas where the investor could be shut down with just one year’s

notice. This brings into question the viability of the Connecting Canadians program

because a portion of the areas requiring infrastructure upgrades (according to the

Government of Canada maps) are in "urban" designated tiers.

161. Given the benefits provided to Canadians today through the use of the 3500 MHz for

fixed wireless Internet access, it is incumbent upon Industry Canada to have a plan that

allows such services to continue to serve Canadians. That means not displacing

existing licensees providing service to Canadians or providing a substitute spectrum

that works with the existing equipment of the licensees so that service is not disrupted

to Canadians. The displacement options offered are not real options because both

options result in services to Canadians being shut down.

162. In summary, it is premature to consider displacement without a band plan or

alternative spectrum being made available to accommodate networks currently

delivering services. Xplornet does not support the “use it and lose it” displacement

- 38 -

proposals. No Canadian should lose Internet service to facilitate a future unknown

“need” for mobile spectrum that may never materialize.

163. Xplornet’s mission is to make affordable and reliable Internet services available to

rural Canadians no matter where they live in Canada. As a result, we are extremely

disappointed that the proposals contained in the Consultation Paper provide no plan

for spectrum to be used for Internet services in the areas of the Canada where over

50% of rural Canadians live. Instead, the Consultation Paper, if implemented, will

result in a giant step backward and once again rip open the urban/rural digital divide

that Canada has almost closed in the last five years.

164. We sincerely hope that Industry Canada steps back from the approach set forth in the

Consultation Paper and considers what is currently being done and what can be done

in the future with the 3500 MHz spectrum to benefit Canadians.

165. Xplornet thanks Industry Canada for considering its alternative proposal and for the

opportunity to provide these comments on the proposals in the Consultation Paper.

*** End of Document ***

Internet ● Private Networks ● Towers

204 Cardinal Crescent   Saskatoon, SK   S7L 6H8 garth.hetterly@yourlinkinc.net; (306) 657‐3144; Cell (306) 717‐0735 

YourLink Inc. 

Comments on SGSO‐003‐14 

Consultation on Policy Change in 3500 MHz band  

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed change to allocation of the 3.5 GHz band. 

 

Preamble We would like to encourage Industry Canada Spectrum Management and Telecommunications (IC) to 

allow other stakeholders to comment on the Policy Change.  Such stakeholders as towns, villages, and 

rural municipalities should have a mechanism to comment on the significant change to their future. In 

Saskatchewan, many of these councils consist of agricultural producers who have been working hard on 

their 2014 harvest. Many of these groups only meet monthly so the relatively short period that IC 

provided for comments makes it impractical for these groups to meet and respond to the IC proposal to 

voice their concerns. 

In addition, we would encourage stakeholder meetings to discuss the proposal including the proposed 

band plans similar to the meetings related to the change in the 2.6 GHz spectrum.  

As you are likely aware, YourLink was involved in the process followed for the 2.6 GHz spectrum change. 

We are still working on the transition of approximately 2,500 subscribers and we have committed over 

$1 million to this transition. The transition from one spectrum band to another is extremely costly, time 

consuming and disruptive to our subscribers. We recognize the need to keep spectrum plans current but 

we encourage IC and the Government to recognize there is a major challenge to Canadians related to 

these changes.  

We believe license terms should extend beyond the traditional 10 year term if the licenses have 

substantially been deployed upon. If there is a legitimate need to change the spectrum plan and the 

Government intends to re‐auction the spectrum, there needs to be consideration for compensation to 

fixed wireless operators to allow for redeployment in order to preserve effective services to Canadians. 

In the past, wireless equipment has typically had a 10 year life expectancy but with future of LTE the 

equipment acquired today will likely operate for more than 10 years.  

Fixed Wireless Access operators (FWA) are dependent on the availability of equipment. Equipment 

manufacturers typically develop licensed radios for a much larger market than just Canada. It is common 

for current technology to take many years to reach the Canadian market. For example, in 2014 Cambium 

finally released their licensed equipment for the 3.5 GHz band nearly 10 years after the introduction of 

the initial auctions. The product offering is a substantial gain over the unlicensed equipment that 

Cambium previously had available – approximately 15x more capacity, more power to provide a better 

connection to the subscriber, a more robust modulation scheme and so on. It would be exceedingly 

difficult to have spectrum now repatriated and lost by the FWA now that equipment is finally available 

and is affordable to most FWA operators. 

Internet ● Private Networks ● Towers

204 Cardinal Crescent   Saskatoon, SK   S7L 6H8 garth.hetterly@yourlinkinc.net; (306) 657‐3144; Cell (306) 717‐0735 

We encourage IC to recognize the differences between the fixed wireless operators and the mobile 

operators. We provide wireless services in approximately 50% of the area of the mobile operator but 

they have nearly 75 times more subscribers. Every one of our subscribers require a “truck roll” to setup 

their equipment whereas the mobile operator does not need any visits to the home to initiate service to 

its subscribers. The financial capabilities of the mobile operator are obviously substantially greater than 

the traditional FWA.  The displacement of the existing FWA subscriber service from one spectrum band 

to another is far more difficult and more of a financial burden than that of the mobile operator.  

We would like to see some type of long‐term licensing arrangement that recognizes the challenges of 

the FWA and of rural Canadians. 

We would also like to emphasize the needs of the FWA operators. Obviously IC’s DC150 program 

considers some general needs of FWA operators but we also would like to point out the unique needs 

close to smaller cities like Saskatoon, Regina, Prince Albert and Moosejaw. Many Canadians, and a huge 

number of Saskatchewan residents, have been choosing to migrate to acreage living. The challenge for 

this growing number of subscribers is to gain similar access to the internet as is available to urban 

residents. In Saskatchewan, urban residents are being offered up the 100 Mbps services while most rural 

(acreage) residents are being offered 1 ½ to 2 Mbps. The reliability of licensed spectrum is paramount to 

be able to deliver even a 5 Mbps service.  

LTE is a primary step ahead to delivering reliable, effective, managed, spectral efficient internet service 

that also allows for future developments. We have been considering the initial equipment offerings for a 

number of years but with the low population density in many areas the cost was prohibitive (more than 

50% of our service locations have less than 35 subscribers). The initial equipment value was such that 

the payback of the investment required was close to 5 years. Current equipment now being introduced 

into the market is still expensive but the costs can be justified.  

Specific Comments  

1. Industry Canada invites comments on its proposal to classify Tier 4 service areas as either

urban or rural for the band 3475-3650 MHz, using Statistics Canada’s 2011 definition for population centres, as outlined in Annex A.  

We are very concerned regarding the classification between urban and rural areas. Initially, the 

threshold for an “urban population” of 30,000 seems unrealistic for a low density populated province 

like Saskatchewan. Where the population is migrating there will be a larger number of acreage owners 

who are desperate for the use of the reliable spectrum. Urban dwellers have wired services and many 

are seeing significant upgrades in their wired services in Saskatchewan to fiber optic cabling whereas the 

acreage owners have no such free offerings.  

If such a division is considered necessary then we believe urban areas should only extend a short 

distance from the particular urban municipality borders and there should be a separate frequency 

maintained to provide a fixed wireless system outside the urban border. 

Internet ● Private Networks ● Towers

204 Cardinal Crescent   Saskatoon, SK   S7L 6H8 garth.hetterly@yourlinkinc.net; (306) 657‐3144; Cell (306) 717‐0735 

Unfortunately, with current equipment wireless signals can carry long distances and we do not believe 

that there can be an effective dividing line between high density areas and low density areas. We 

believe the idea of sharing the spectrum between urban and rural will cause more problems than 

potential gains.  

27. Auctioned FWA licences in the 3500 MHz band had a 10-year term and included conditions of licence, such as deployment. These licences began expiring in March 2014 and continue to expire until December 2019. As stated in the Renewal Decision, licensees that are in compliance with all conditions of licence (including deployment), are eligible to be issued a new one-year licence. Licences which are not eligible for renewal will be returned to the Department and would be made available through a new licensing process.  

We believe that the initial 10 years has been spent simply waiting for practical and affordable 

technology to become available.  Going forward, one year renewals are far too short of period to 

warrant the significant investment required to deploy services. Affordable technology is just reaching 

the fixed wireless industry that will allow for future growth (LTE). We believe the existing licenses should 

be extended for an additional 5 years and then should be extended for 10 years if deployed. Thereafter, 

the license should be eligible to future extensions or compensation to allow users to be converted to a 

new spectrum if IC can adequately prove there is a net benefit to Canada for its conversion to another 

use.  

2. Industry Canada invites comments on its proposal to make available spectrum licences in tier areas classified as rural, through a first-come, first-served process.  

Now that equipment suitable for deployment has finally reached the market, we believe that incumbent 

licencees should retain priority for renewal and be provided an adequate opportunity to deploy before 

licences are offered to new entrants on a first‐come, first served process. The ability of the proposed 

new entrants should be considered: do they have towers available; do they have the capability of 

establishing towers and the network in a timely manner; do they have the ability and understanding of 

deploying a licensed network effectively; and does the equipment have required spectral efficiencies.  

We encourage IC to put in place evaluation criteria to ensure the operators have a thorough 

understanding of the use of licensed spectrum. We believe IC will have a major role to play to ensure the 

spectrum being used by an operator is within their license and that equipment is registered for Canada.  

Regular audits will be required.   

3. Industry Canada invites comments on these licences being issued as annual spectrum licences, defined on a per grid-cell basis and authorized only for the amount of spectrum required to operate (refer to Section 7.3).  

30. Moreover, issuing spectrum licences on a more granular level, such as using grid-cells19 rather than for an entire Tier 4 service area, means that licences can be obtained for the desired operating area rather than having to seek a single licence for an entire Tier 4 area. It is anticipated that this approach would permit services to be delivered to a greater number of

Internet ● Private Networks ● Towers

204 Cardinal Crescent   Saskatoon, SK   S7L 6H8 garth.hetterly@yourlinkinc.net; (306) 657‐3144; Cell (306) 717‐0735 

communities. This approach also allows for more efficient use of the spectrum and helps to manage the demand, depending on the amount of spectrum available following the renewal process, more than one licence can be issued in a given spectrum block in a given tier area.  

Implementation in practice of the grid cell model is very difficult in part because of the extended 

coverage of fixed wireless LTE. One manufacturer has indicated that we will see at least a doubling of 

the coverage area with their upcoming LTE products. If this is true then coordination of spectrum 

deployment will become extremely difficult.  In a very large Tier 4 service area, like Prince Albert, that 

has a very low density population base (outside of the small urban centre that is in the service area) the 

concept of grid‐cells does not work well as a high number of grid cells would be required to cover a very 

small number of potential subscribers. The grid cell itself should be defined based on a minimum 

population.   

4. Industry Canada invites comments on its proposal to modify the current notification period for existing point-to-point, fixed stations such that those affecting the implementation of new FWA systems in rural Tier 4 areas would now be afforded a notification period of six months. Assuming that by fixed stations IC is referring to FWA operators that may be displaced from urban areas if the proposed Policy Changes in the 3500 MHz band proceeds, we believe 6 months may be an unrealistic period. The tower construction process can take nearly six months by itself and in some cases if public hearings are required it may take upwards of two years.  We would endorse IC requiring a plan for deployment with significant benchmarks and have reporting each 6 months. If there are valid reasons for delays the period should be extended.  

6. Industry Canada invites comments on the conditions of licence in Annex B.  

A typical 3.5 GHz system may cost anywhere from $30,000 to over $100,000. If the license period is as 

short as 1 year the prices to the subscriber that an operator would need to charge in order to recoup its 

investment would be prohibitive. The license period must allow the operator to recover their 

investment over a reasonable time period. Many broadband backhaul and gateway contracts are for a 

minimum of 3 years and many providers require 5 years.  

IC needs to encourage operators to deploy the latest and best equipment which certainly requires a 

longer term commitment.  

If the operator can prove the deployment to significant subscribers and potential population then the 

license should be a minimum of 10 years and should be automatically renewed for additional terms.  

New rules being established by IC or the government should be vetted with an industry advisory group.  

7. Industry Canada invites comments on its proposal to fundamentally reallocate the 3500 MHz band (3475-3650 MHz) to include mobile services and its proposed changes to the Canadian Table of Frequency Allocations as found in Annex C.  

Internet ● Private Networks ● Towers

204 Cardinal Crescent   Saskatoon, SK   S7L 6H8 garth.hetterly@yourlinkinc.net; (306) 657‐3144; Cell (306) 717‐0735 

We do not see any purpose in differentiating between mobile and fixed wireless, most of the new Fixed 

Wireless LTE systems will communicate with mobile devices.  

If there is a fixed wireless system in a remote rural area that provides service and there is no mobile 

operator then it would make best sense for the public interest to use the access point and tower in the 

region to provide all services (mobile and fixed). The LTE system’s authentication database would be 

best to determine whether the AP should allow the mobile user to access the network.  

 

The line between mobile and fixed wireless is blurring. Many of the users of mobile devices – like tablets 

and laptops ‐‐ are looking for connection throughout their coverage area. Some of the LTE systems have 

a USB card that can provide a connection to the rural user whether at home, at the local rink or in the 

wheat field.  

8. Industry Canada invites comments on its geographically differentiated policy where mobile services will be allowed in urban tiers, and fixed services will be allowed in rural tiers (refer to Section 6 for the definition of urban and rural tiers).

We believe there should not be any such geographically differentiated policy. We believe that any such 

policy will detract from the value of either system. Urban areas normally have a high number of acreage 

owners who have no alternative other than the fixed wireless systems. These residents are normally 

high consumers of internet for business and other purposes.  

 

If such a division is considered necessary then we believe urban areas should only extend a short 

distance from the particular urban municipality borders and there should be a separate frequency 

maintained to provide a fixed wireless system outside the urban border. For example, service area 4128 

Prince Albert – the urban area is approximately 7 square kilometers but the entire territory is 

approximately 80,000 square kilometers. It would be more than fair to state that 99.991% of the area is 

rural and 0.009% of the area is urban; in our opinion it makes no sense to call this an urban area.  

 

If it is necessary to differentiate between rural and urban, the determination should be based on density 

of population and the urban center should exceed 1 million residents.  

9. Industry Canada invites comments on its two proposed options for displacement. Treatment of Incumbent Licensees in Urban Tier 4 Areas Following a Proposed Fundamental Reallocation of the 3500 MHz Band.

All fixed wireless operators that have deployed in the existing 3.5 GHz band should remain and be 

relicensed for a minimum of 10 years and thereafter if there is not a more important use of the 

spectrum. If there needs to be some shifting around within the band then it is our recommendation that 

IC consider providing grants to replace equipment to accommodate the new band plan.