speaker:Host Welcome to Docket Rocket's Regulatory Roundup. Today we are coving a topic that has been one of the hottest stories in the spectrum world. We are going to discuss Docket 25-173, an inquiry by the Space Bureau into EchoStar’s use of the 2 gigahertz band. The proceeding seeks to determine if EchoStar is meeting its mobile-satellite service, or MSS, licensing obligations.
speaker:Analyst That's correct. The inquiry also looks to explore options for more intensive use of the band. The FCC has built a formal record of comments from industry stakeholders on the future of this spectrum.
speaker:Host Let's start with the basics. What's this inquiry about?
speaker:Analyst On May 12th, 2025, the Space Bureau issued a Public Notice to gather information on EchoStar's MSS operations in the 2 GHz band. EchoStar holds market access for two geostationary satellites in this band, Terrestar T-1 and DBSD G-1, and is also the licensee for Advanced Wireless Service, or AWS-4, terrestrial operations. Questions have been raised about whether EchoStar is providing robust MSS in accordance with its authorizations.
speaker:Host And this has obviously generated significant debate and a high profile showdown between EchoStar, SpaceX, the Commission, and President Trump.
speaker:Analyst It has. Setting aside the controversy happening beyond the docket, let's focus on what has been filed by stakeholders on Docket 25-173.
speaker:Host Agreed. What are the commenters arguments? Let's begin with those who want to see the band opened.
speaker:Analyst Several companies urged the Commission to open the 2 GHz band to new providers. The central argument is that the spectrum is underutilized. SpaceX asserted that EchoStar has never provided 2 GHz MSS service in the U.S. and is warehousing the spectrum.
speaker:Host What is the legal basis for that claim?
speaker:Analyst SpaceX contends EchoStar’s market access authorizations have legally terminated. They cite two provisions: Section 25.161(c) for automatic termination due to non-use, and Section 25.121(a)(1) regarding the expiration of the 15-year license term. They point to EchoStar’s own financial reports valuing the satellites at zero and CEO statements indicating MSS service is years away.
speaker:Host Were other companies aligned with SpaceX?
speaker:Analyst Yes. Iridium Communications stated that if the band is underutilized, it should be opened to new MSS applicants to alleviate its own capacity constraints. Omnispace urged the FCC to rescind a 2013 waiver that reversed a portion of the band to a downlink direction for EchoStar's terrestrial use, arguing it hinders harmonized Direct-to-Device deployment. Sateliot and Skylo also pushed for new entrants to facilitate satellite IoT and D2D services.
speaker:Host What is EchoStar’s response to these claims?
speaker:Analyst EchoStar argues it has met all of its buildout commitments, including accelerated 5G milestones confirmed by the Bureau in 2023. They state they have deployed over 24,000 5G sites covering over 80 percent of the U.S. population. They also claim they are pioneering new D2D services based on 3GPP standards.
speaker:Host And what about the core issue of sharing the band?
speaker:Analyst EchoStar’s primary technical argument is that sharing the 2 GHz band is infeasible. They assert the Commission has consistently found that co-frequency sharing between separate MSS operators and terrestrial mobile service is not possible without causing widespread harmful interference. EchoStar claims a new entrant would "obliterate" its terrestrial 5G network and MSS operations, constituting an effective revocation of its licenses.
speaker:Host Has EchoStar received support for this position?
speaker:Analyst Yes. A coalition of over 60 entities filed in its favor. This includes trade groups like CCIA, INCOMPAS, and the Competitive Carriers Association, who argue that revoking EchoStar’s license would harm competition by removing the nation's fourth carrier. Public Knowledge and the Open Technology Institute echoed this, stating it would jeopardize a multi-billion dollar investment in a nationwide O-RAN network.
speaker:Host This extends to its business partners as well?
speaker:Analyst Correct. Eleven O-RAN technology partners, including Mavenir and Samsung, filed letters highlighting EchoStar's role in the U.S. O-RAN ecosystem. They argue that harming its deployment would undermine U.S. leadership in next-generation infrastructure and national security. The Free State Foundation also argued that reversing EchoStar's deadline extensions would threaten its "investment-backed expectations" and regulatory certainty.
speaker:Host Moving to the reply comments, how did the challengers respond to EchoStar's defense?
speaker:Analyst In replies, challengers directly attacked EchoStar's legal and technical claims. SpaceX reiterated its argument of spectrum warehousing and license termination. It also introduced analysis from Spectrum Financial Partners, which claimed EchoStar inflated its terrestrial coverage showings. Kepler Communications argued EchoStar's claims of technical infeasibility for sharing are unsubstantiated, pointing to international examples in Australia and the EU where regulators are enabling shared use. Omnispace argued the record shows a "D2D Spectrum Deficit" that justifies authorizing new operators.
speaker:Host And how did EchoStar counter in its own reply?
speaker:Analyst EchoStar argued the record overwhelmingly supports its position, characterizing opposing filings as attempts to relitigate decided matters. It submitted a technical study concluding that separate terrestrial and satellite systems cannot co-exist in the band. Legally, it dismissed claims that its MSS authorizations have expired and argued the Bureau had clear authority to grant its buildout extensions. The company also noted in an ex parte filing that the "dark cloud of uncertainty" from the proceeding is hindering its business decisions.
speaker:Host So to summarize, what are the key takeaways from this proceeding so far?
speaker:Analyst There are two competing narratives. On one side, companies like SpaceX argue that EchoStar is warehousing valuable spectrum, its licenses have expired, and the band must be opened to new entrants to support next-generation D2D services. On the other side, EchoStar and a broad coalition of supporters argue that the company is fulfilling its obligations, has built a nationwide 5G O-RAN network, and that sharing the band is technically infeasible and would harm competition and regulatory stability.
speaker:Host The outcome will have significant implications for EchoStar, its partners, creditors, shareholders, and the future use of the 2 GHz band for both terrestrial and satellite services.
speaker:Analyst Thanks for tuning in to Docket Rocket's Regulatory Roundup. If you want access to the data that I used to create this docket summary, check out docket-rocket.io. Docket Rocket retrieves filings as soon as they are released, summarizes them, and sends you alert, if you want that. Set up email alerts for dockets or filers that you care about. For instance, if you want an email alert when EchoStar or SpaceX file anything in any proceeding, Docket Rocket has you covered. You'll have access to a summary of their filing as soon as it's released on the FCC's website! Check it out, at docket-hyphen-rocket-dot-io... that's docket hyphen rocket dot IO. Check it out! You'll be glad you did!
Share this post