Proposed FCC Policy Change Threatens Utility Services, Affordability

A proposed policy change at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is drawing significant attention from across the utility, transportation, and public safety sectors due to its potential to disrupt critical infrastructure and impose substantial costs on consumers. Technology company NextNav has requested the FCC re-band the lower 900 MHz radio frequency spectrum in the U.S. for its priority use. This rule change would enrich NextNav owners at the public’s considerable expense.

The lower 900 MHz spectrum is currently the backbone for a multitude of essential services, including advanced metering infrastructure for electric, gas, and water utilities. More than 160 million meters depend on this frequency band to deliver real-time data, improve operational efficiency, and support reliability for nearly 200 million Americans. This same spectrum also supports tolling systems like EZ-Pass, railroad safety networks, SCADA systems, municipal flood warning systems, security infrastructure, logistics tracking, and home automation applications.

NextNav argues an FCC rule change will enable the company to create a GPS-like service to bolster U.S. national security; however, less disruptive options already exist that could deliver a comparable solution much faster. NextNav’s solution is unnecessary, and the risks posed to the public are unacceptable.

Profound Ripple Effects

If the FCC were to grant NextNav preemptive rights to the 900 MHz spectrum, the ripple effects could be profound. Existing utility metering infrastructure, which is expected to generate at least $20 billion in benefits over the next five years, according to approved utility rate cases, would become inoperable.

The resulting need to revert to manual meter reading, coupled with the subsequent deployment of replacement solutions, could increase costs for ratepayers by an estimated $100 billion, according to our estimates. These expenditures would not enhance or expand current services but simply maintain the status quo for utilities that have already invested in and rely on these systems.

The opportunity costs for utilities are equally significant. Resources currently earmarked for grid modernization, resilience, and meeting new energy demands — particularly those driven by the rapid expansion of data centers and artificial intelligence — would be diverted to replace functioning systems.

This shift could slow progress toward broader energy goals and innovation. Concerns over the proposed policy change are not limited to the utility sector. Public safety organizations, transportation leaders, security providers, logistics groups, and major retailers have voiced their opposition, emphasizing the far-reaching consequences for public safety, commerce, and everyday life.

This is not the first time that utilities and their economic regulators have faced FCC petitions from private interests to radically change spectrum etiquette in the 900 MHz band; changes that would cost utilities — and by default, ratepayers — hundreds of millions of dollars to mitigate interference and/or replace impacted infrastructure.

AMI/SCADA Interference Mitigation

At its winter meeting in 2013, NARUC recognized the risk to reliable utility services and potential rate implications for ratepayers, passing a resolution titled Resolution to Promote Co-Existence in the 902-928 MHz Spectrum Band. The resolution was in response to unacceptable levels of interference with utility AMI and SCADA infrastructure, resulting from a license that was going to be issued within the band to a company called Progeny (now part of NextNav) for location services.

NARUC recommended that the FCC delay issuing any final decision until interference on lower power devices in the 900 MHz band could be sufficiently mitigated. Good advice then and now.

Once again, state utility commissioners should weigh in and voice their concerns that the FCC should not make any rash decisions on issuing licenses within the 900 MHz band without conditions to mitigate any interference with ratepayer-funded utility infrastructure.

The FCC should prioritize solutions that preserve affordability and limit unnecessary costs for consumers. Ensuring that existing infrastructure and essential services remain uninterrupted is critical, particularly at a time when affordability and reliability are more important than ever.

When it comes to RF spectrum use, the words of Mr. Spock ring true, “The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one.”