HILL MONITORING UWB, URGES FCC TO NOT DELAY THURS. VOTE

That dynamic was evident in Fri. meeting in Washington when NTIA met with private sector about continued deliberations to move toward final UWB rule, industry source said. NTIA Assoc. Administrator Michael Gallagher told industry representatives he couldn’t provide specifics on how final item was shaping up, source said. Sunshine period for proceeding closed last Thurs., in advance of FCC agenda meeting. NTIA recommendation on UWB that was given to FCC last month hasn’t been released publicly. Several industry participants at meeting raised concerns about why process leading up to final vote hadn’t been more transparent, source said.

Issue also came up in recent ex parte filing by Short Range Automotive Radar Frequency Allocation (SARA) group, which represents auto and auto-component makers who are developing 24 GHz short-range radar (SRR) systems. SARA, which counts Ford, General Motors and DaimlerChrysler among its members, focuses on SRR technology that provides collision avoidance systems for vehicles. Such systems are envisioned to provide safety services such as being able to identify child playing under rear wheel of auto before driver puts car in reverse. Jan. 30 FCC filing by group said that NTIA concerns reportedly would bar UWB short-range radar systems operating at 24 GHz. Filing said that “the NTIA transmittal has not been entered into the proceeding record or otherwise made available for SARA’s review.” SARA said NTIA transmittal to Commission essentially would mandate SRR operations to be located in higher band so no emissions would occur in 23.6-24 GHz band now allocated for radio astronomy and passive earth sensing. “SARA, to say the least, was greatly surprised,” it wrote, “to hear the reports that after nearly 4 years of this closely watched proceeding in which none of the 800-plus filings have suggested that 24 GHz SRRs could present an interference problem, NTIA now purportedly presents a proposal to the FCC that would effectively ban this technology. With barely 2 weeks before the FCC’s expected decision, SARA finds itself in a Kafkaesque dilemma of responding to arguments it has not seen and perhaps do not even exist.” Reported NTIA transmittal isn’t needed to prevent interference and would delay “for many years the significant public safety benefits of SRRs,” SARA said.

Rep. Upton (R-Mich.) wrote to Commerce Secy. Donald Evans Feb. 6, saying “potential safety benefits of 24 GHz automotive radars are significant.” Upton told Evans: “With UWB, injuries and damages associated with many accidents can be mitigated or avoided.” Upton said NTIA’s public comments in proceeding hadn’t raised concerns about harmful interference for any govt. system as result of UWB operations at 24 GHz. “I would hope,” Upton said, “that if, during the waning days of these proceedings, there are any allegations of harmful interference or other objections, which are made by the government outside the scope of the public comments, that the companies which plan to use UWB radar technology in the 24 GHz frequency range would be given an opportunity to see the data and analysis upon which such allegations would be based and given an opportunity to respond.”

Former FCC Office of Engineering & Technology chief Dale Hatfield, who now teaches at U. of Colo. at Boulder, said present coordination system between NTIA and FCC was double- edged. (As counterpart regulator to FCC on spectrum issues, NTIA is exempt from making ex parte filings in such proceedings). Hatfield told us that on one hand, it made sense that policymakers be able to communicate on technical issues on informal basis, but price that was paid for system was that certain amount of transparency was lost. “There is an awful lot at stake in this proceeding” in terms of process and precedent, he said. “The difficulty we have is we don’t have anybody above these 2 agencies.”

Some industry observers have said they were concerned that final outcome of UWB proceeding not have FCC exerting undue regulatory authority over govt.-protected bands. One major concern in UWB docket has been over potential interference that UWB could pose for govt.-protected systems such as GPS. Others have voiced concern that final decision not effectively give too much power to Executive Branch over outcome. On policy issues that involve both govt. and nongovt. spectrum, NTIA and FCC are required to coordinate. Former NTIA Dir. Gregory Rohde, who handled UWB issues during his tenure at agency in Clinton Administration, dismissed concerns that NTIA’s input into such proceedings was secret. “I would argue that it’s not done in secret, although the NTIA’s IRAC [Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee] is not open to the public in all its deliberations,” Rohde said. “NTIA’s decisions and actions are part of an open, public FCC proceeding. It is not fair to say that the public is shut out,” he said, noting such decisions are made jointly by FCC and NTIA, with latter as “equal regulator” because of its role over federal govt. spectrum. “The FCC does not have the legal authority to make a decision on a commercial service in a government band. It needs to coordinate that with NTIA.”

Part of Hill interest apparently has centered on how regulatory process has played out on UWB, including transparency issues, several industry sources said. Among those tracking process part of proceeding has been Senate Commerce Committee Chmn. Hollings (D-S.C.). Spokesman was attending Enron hearing Tues. and couldn’t be reached for comment.

Sen. Warner (R-Va.), ranking minority member on Senate Armed Services Committee, met with FCC Chmn. Powell earlier this month on progress of UWB proceeding. Warner is in unique position of having both Vienna, Va.-based UWB developer XtremeSpectrum in his home state and serving on committee with purview over Defense Dept., which has raised concerns over interference potential of UWB to GPS. Other federal agencies, including Transportation Dept. and NASA, also have raised serious concerns about potential of UWB to cause harmful interference to govt. systems in protected bands. At meeting with Powell, Warner voiced his interest in having technical issues involving UWB worked out, and relayed some of concerns he had received from DoD and others, Senate aide said. Warner hasn’t raised explicit concerns about how process has worked so far in trying to reach agreement among federal agencies, aide said. Senate staffer said Warner had observed that UWB proceeding “was a political scientist’s dream” to analyze because of because of varying positions of federal agencies, which raised interesting questions whether Executive Branch could overrule FCC decision on UWB. “I don’t think Senator Warner has any questions about the process,” aide said.

Sen. Burns (R-Mont.), ranking minority member of Senate Commerce Committee’s Communications Subcommittee, sees his role in monitoring UWB proceeding as being “3rd party” facilitator, spokesman said. Burns wrote to FCC Chmn. Powell in Dec. to urge regulators to be “cognizant of GPS issues,” spokesman said, noting that letter wasn’t being released by his office.

Burns had circulated “Dear Colleague” letter on UWB along with Sen. Inhofe (R-Okla.) last month that never was sent to FCC, several sources said. Unsigned Jan. 23 draft of letter obtained by Communications Daily would have urged FCC to not act on order that allowed UWB technology to operate under Part 15 rules for intentional transmissions. Instead, it would have recommended that Commission continue to regulate technology with experimental licenses until more information on UWB operations could be obtained.

In Feb. 11 letter, Rep. Davis (R-Va.) urged FCC to vote on UWB item Thurs., as planned. “As the February 14 meeting nears, I want to convey to you my concerns that if this proceeding is delayed any further, the commercial UWB industry will disappear, and the lead in this promising technology will be handed over to foreign competitors and governments who are anxious to displace us,” Davis said, adding that rules also should protect incumbent spectrum users such as safety-of-life applications. “If we allow this proceeding to be further delayed, the federal government approval process will have become an insurmountable obstacle to block new unlicensed technologies,” Davis told Powell. On Feb. 6, Rep. Pickering (R-Miss.) also urged FCC not to delay UWB vote. “It is my understanding that the Commission has already fashioned a workable solution that will protect government and other incumbent spectrum users, including those in the PCS and GPS bands,” he wrote. “I urge you to trust the expertise of the Commission’s engineers in determining the emissions levels at which ultra-wideband devices should be permitted to operate.”