Modernizing Satellite Spectrum Rules Is Key to U.S. Space Leadership

In 1843, the U.S. government provided Samuel Morse a $30,000 grant to build a demonstration telegraph line between Washington and Baltimore. Within 50 years, the main U.S. telegraph company, Western Union, became a business powerhouse, with profit margins close to 40 percent. Its decline, however, was foreshadowed by Alexander Graham Bell’s invention in 1876 of the telephone—an innovation that left an even more profound impact on telecommunications than Morse’s telegraph. For a time, telegraphy offered competitive advantages, such as providing a written record and easier long-distance connections over the telephone, but those advantages gradually disappeared as new technologies were introduced by the telephone industry. Instead of viewing the rapid adoption of the telephone as an opportunity, the U.S. government saw it as a threat to the status quo and took steps to protect the telegraph industry. However, despite decades of U.S. government policy interventions to hold back the tide of innovation and allow a stagnant business model to take precedence over a revolutionary new one, the U.S. telegraph went the way of the dodo bird when Western Union sold off its telegraph business in 1988.

A similar struggle—between the status quo and innovation—is again playing out, which will shape how we communicate for decades and influence the success of U.S. companies in their competition with Chinese peers on the global stage. In recent years, low Earth orbit (LEO) satellite constellations operating in non-geostationary orbit (NGSO) have emerged as the modern equivalent of the telephone—an innovative commercial communications technology that has profound strategic implications. While these constellations were deployed for commercial purposes, they have proven equally useful for civilian and military applications. The same satellites that provide broadband to households, particularly in exurban and rural areas, have been critical to enabling Ukraine to defend itself against Russia’s invasion. Moreover, just as was the case with the telegraph and telephone, the policy choices that the United States government makes in the coming years will play a critical role in determining whether it continues to lead in a technology that will help to determine the course of great power competition.

Most immediately, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is in the process of deciding whether to change rules regarding Equivalent Power Flux Density that govern spectrum sharing between newer NGSO satellites—which do not stay stationary relative to the earth—and traditional geostationary orbit (GEO) satellite systems—which stay in a stationary position relative to earth because they operate at a high orbit of approximately 35,786 kilometers. While it’s easy to ignore an obscure technical debate at the FCC, what the commission decides in this proceeding will have significant implications for the United States’ economic and national security.

The current sharing rules were adopted at the turn of the twenty-first century, when GEO satellites dominated the commercial satellite sector, and the resulting rules put the burden on NGSO systems to protect GEO systems. While these rules were adopted when the hit social app was MySpace and the greatest threat to humanity was the Y2K bug, GEO operators have argued in the past that we shouldn’t even study changing them. In recent decades, the satellite industry has evolved, with LEO constellations playing an increasingly critical role. Further, satellite technology has also matured, with advances such as adaptive coding and modulation making GEO satellites more robust to interference. All these developments have undermined the rationale for the current rules—the rules can be changed without any impact on GEO operators.

The benefit of changing the rules is enormous. Revising the rules will allow LEO constellations to operate more efficiently—more customers could be served by the same number of satellites. This means that constellations already in orbit will be able to serve a greater number of customers across the United States and, if similar revisions are adopted elsewhere, around the world. More efficient operation also improves space safety because the number of satellites needed to over a certain level of service decreases and, thus, reduces the number of objects in orbit that could one day pose debris generation risks. Like other nations and regions, such as Europe, that look to enact space regulation to improve space safety, they should consider how revising spectrum rules can play a key role in such initiatives.

The FCC’s decision in this proceeding will help to decide the future of the United States’ LEO constellations. While the United States has a good start, with several satellite operators launching massive constellations, the People’s Republic of China is currently in the process of deploying competing constellations. If the FCC decides to adjust the rules to put NGSO constellations on more equal footing with GEO constellations, this will significantly bolster LEO operators’ position in the United States market, enabling them to serve more areas with faster and more reliable satellite service than they do today. The additional revenue that LEO operators would make in this market could help to fund their global ambitions, enabling them to compete with PRC LEO operators in other markets. Further, it would help to level the playing field between incumbents and new entrants, enabling LEO operators with innovative technologies to compete with incumbents based on merit, instead of being held back by outdated technical rules.

Matt Pearl is the director of the Strategic Technologies Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, D.C. Clayton Swope is the deputy director of the Aerospace Security Project and a senior fellow in the Defense and Security Department