DoD SPELLS OUT PROPOSED UWB RESTRICTIONS TO PROTECT GPS
Asst. Defense Secy. for Command, Control, Communications & Intelligence John Stenbit spelled out Pentagon’s ultra- wideband (UWB) position for NTIA Fri., saying DoD required that there be no intentional emissions below 4.2 GHz except for imaging systems. That position, outlined in Stenbit letter to Commerce Dept.’s Deputy Asst. Secy. for Communications & Information Michael Gallagher, doesn’t reflect harder line approach of agencies such as Dept. of Transportation and NASA. Those parts of federal govt., which share DoD concerns about potential of UWB to interfere with GPS-dependent systems, still advocate no intentional emissions “below 6 GHz, period,” industry source said. DoD proposal to bar UWB emissions below 4.2 GHz, with some limited exceptions, is “a long-term position taken to protect vital DoD systems that ensure our national security,” Stenbit said in letter released Mon.: “That position is further justified by recent public reports that such initial rollouts may constitute just the ‘camel’s nose under the tent’ of commercial investment in UWB.” FCC plans to take up UWB item at Feb. 14 meeting.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
DoD’s proposed restrictions for UWB include no intentional emissions below 4.2 GHz and out-of-band emissions that would meet “stringent standards” previously provided by DoD to NTIA staffers. Compliance with those restrictions could be achieved “easily” with installation of high pass filter with cutoff at 4.2 GHz at input to UWB transmitting antennas, Stenbit said. But he told NTIA’s Gallagher that “current FCC draft order” posed 2 more issues: (1) Commission is proposing to approve unlicensed and uncoordinated use of UWB devices in all bands, including those in which Part 15 intentional transmissions now are restricted. “Never before has the FCC considered authorizing such unconstrained usage of spectrum that includes restricted bands,” Stenbit wrote. “This holds the dangerous potential to set a precedent whereby the FCC could eliminate the protection of restricted government bands, which are essential to national security, safety of life and the economic security of the nation.” (2) Proposed order was “not seeking to impose aggregation controls in the licensing process,” Stenbit wrote. “This lack of any aggregation limits may pose a threat to vital national security systems and operations.”
Stenbit said DoD had finalized technical studies of UWB emissions and given NTIA updated numbers to allow UWB technology to be implemented above 4.2 GHz. “We wish to emphasize that our analysis clearly points to the fact that emission limits imposed by the FCC must be based on conservative technical values,” letter said: “All emissions, including emission spikes, must be below the emission limits provided by DoD.” Stenbit outlined approach that would allow certain “limited, niche-market exceptions” for UWB operations below 4.2 GHz, such as ground-penetrating radar and see- through-wall applications.
Stenbit acknowledged that other federal agencies used restricted bands above 4.2 GHz that Pentagon was proposing. “Those organizations also wish to protect their systems from interference and can benefit from a high pass filter having a cut-off point at a higher frequency,” he said. In general, he said DoD supports UWB development. “However, DoD seeks to ensure that such development will proceed in a prudent manner consistent with core national security needs and objectives,” he said. Letter appeared to mark compromise of sorts among various factions of DoD that had taken different positions on UWB, source said.
Meanwhile, on Mon. group of companies that back UWB development urged Commerce Secy. Donald Evans not to let timeline slip further for final action on UWB rules. FCC had taken UWB item off its Dec. 12 open meeting agenda, at request of Evans, who had sought more time for federal govt. analysis to ensure protection of critical govt. operations and safety-of-life services. “We are concerned that the announced short delay could be extended, which in turn would be a substantial setback to the timely development and deployment of UWB devices and services,” technology developers wrote to Evans. Letter was signed by officials of IBM, Intel, Sharp Labs of America, Siemens, Sony, Texas Instruments. “An extended delay could have a negative impact on current momentum focused on building the UWB industry,” it said. Group urged Evans to support FCC’s issuance of UWB order that would allow technology to be introduced.