PETITIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION OF UWB ORDER PILE UP AT FCC

UWB developer Time Domain petitioned for reconsideration late Mon. on 2 main issues, although it said it believed “general limits applied to UWB devices are more conservative than is necessary to protect licensed services from harmful interference.” Time Domain said it backed FCC goal of reexamining UWB rules in 6-12 months from date that order took effect, but it urged Commission to remedy “promptly…without the delay associated with further proceedings” issues of: (1) Limits applied to through-wall imaging using radar devices operated by public safety personnel. Time Domain said rules wouldn’t provide “for the sort of reliability needed in tactical situations.” (2) Rules that would impair effectiveness of tracking systems used to find firemen in burning buildings. It said Part 15 Class B limits were appropriate above 1.6 GHz for public safety applications involving through-wall imaging and firefighter tracking. Equipment for those public safety applications and firefighter tracking should be authorized with emissions levels of up to -41.3 dB, company said.

“Absent the change requested, Time Domain believes that reliable through-the-wall radar units may still be developed, but only for use by personnel that may be able to operate the devices at higher power than permitted under the first report and order -- namely the military, federal officials and for public safety officers in foreign countries,” petition said. Time Domain said “irony” of that would be that state and local law enforcement and firefighters were “by far the personnel most often called upon to handle emergency situations” and they wouldn’t have access to UWB devices in useful form under rule. “At least for civilian public safety applications, such a dichotomy should not exist,” petition said.

Satellite Industry Assn. (SIA) sought review of provisions it said would “expose” fixed satellite service (FSS) systems operating at 4 GHz to harmful interference from UWB devices. FSS systems use C-band for program distribution to cable headends and radio/TV broadcast stations, broadband communications to U.S. Navy vessels, commercial weather data distribution to airlines and pilots, position location and status for trucking fleets. “UWB interference could jeopardize the billions of dollars that have been invested in FSS systems for commercial and national security purposes, and could interrupt vital FSS services,” SIA told FCC. SIA took issue with order’s outdoor emissions limits for handheld UWB devices as being “premised on separation distances that are well beyond the separations that one can expect in actual practice.” It said order discussed FSS interference issues only to extent emissions limits were required to protect FSS earth stations from indoor UWB devices, relying on fact that for indoor UWB operations there would be building between device and FSS earth station that would provide buffer. Problem, SIA said, is that rules allow both indoor and outdoor operation of handheld UWB devices and both scenarios must be taken into account.

In joint petition, Sirius Satellite Radio and XM Radio contended that UWB rules would disrupt their satellite radio services. They said order disregarded “evidence that satellite radio receivers are necessarily highly sensitive and will operate in close proximity to UWB communications and surveillance devices.” Rules allow unlicensed UWB devices to emit “unprecedented amount of energy in the satellite radio band,” which will lead to disruption of their consumer service. XM and Sirius want Commission to adopt limit for UWB devices that prevents emissions from aggregation of those devices from exceeding 8.6 microvolts per meter at 3 meters from Sirius or XM sites. Companies said order was based on several “faulty assumptions,” including exaggeration of link margin available to satellite radio receivers and incorrect assumption that there always would be terrestrial repeater nearby boosting satellite radio signal. Sirius and XM said order didn’t consider previous FCC actions limiting interference in satellite digital audio radio service (SDARS) band to acceptable levels. Instead, UWB order “wrongly focuses” on in-vehicle radar, “which is highly unlikely to interfere with satellite radio because it operates in frequencies over 20 GHz away from the SDARS band.”

Citing concerns over potential for UWB devices to interfere with GPS systems, Aeronautical Radio (ARINC) and Air Transport Assn. of America (ATA) petitioned for partial reconsideration. They urged FCC to permit UWB-based indoor, portable and handheld consumer devices only with UWB bandwidths above 5.5 GHz, instead of 1.99 GHz threshold of rules, except for terrestrially based systems that were subject to coordination. Groups want FCC to restrict average radiated emissions limits between 3.1 and 5.5 GHz to at least -51.3 dB for indoor devices and -61.3 dB for hand-held UWB devices. ARINC and ATA said they weren’t challenging operation of certain low frequency imaging systems below 960 MHz and imaging systems above 3.1 GHz. In other areas, they want FCC to clarify order to provide “quick access to coordination information by licenses and users and licensed services, including but not limited to GPS.”

ARINC and ATA cautioned FCC against making rules more flexible following testing period that Commission had committed to for UWB devices over next 6-12 months. “Given the controversial nature of this proceeding, the very limited testing to date, and the total lack of experience with ‘production’ UWB devices, it would not be sound public policy to jump into a consideration of increased flexibility in this area, or even to promise that such flexibility will be considered pursuant to a specified timetable,” petition said. “There is still considerable, justified concern within the aviation industry about the sufficiency of the rules adopted as testing for UWB interference potential vis a vis many critical aviation systems has not yet occurred.” Groups called for only “public testing program” to justify future changes.

Wireless industry petitions focused on adequacy of analysis of interference that PCS and cellular systems will face under limits established in order. Cingular Wireless petition for reconsideration contended it was “arbitrary and capricious for the Commission to conclude that UWB operation would be interference-free because its decision was premised on a staff report that noted the record lacked evidence regarding actual PCS signals.” Cingular argued that order still concluded that interference analysis for communications systems needed to be based on signal-to-noise ratio using signal levels “actually employed by that system.” Cingular said that without interference analysis “it is legal error” to authorize deployment of UWB devices on “spectrum exclusively assigned to cellular and PCS licensees.” Company said FCC rejected evidence supplied by Qualcomm, wireless licensees and manufacturers involving operations levels that PCS systems were designed to use. “The Commission then proceeded to rely on a staff report that declared all the evidence of real-world conditions to be ‘unreasonable,’ based on a misunderstanding of the CDMA technology used in the CMRS system tested.” Carrier said FCC staff “hypothesized” what real-world minimum signal strengths would be if they were based on maximum signal allowed at PCS boundary, even in absence of evidence that this reflected real-world conditions. Cingular said FCC should bar deployment of UWB devices that produced emissions on cellular and PCS frequencies until evidence was available that those devices didn’t interfere with carrier’s E911 services. It said FCC turned away from longstanding policy that “cellular and PCS licensees have the exclusive right to use their assigned spectrum within their service areas.”

Qualcomm petition for reconsideration raised similar issues, saying UWB order didn’t include necessary safeguards to protect PCS phones from interference, particularly those that relied on GPS-based systems for Enhanced 911 service. Company said FCC adopted emissions mask without test data that verified that UWB devices operating at those limits wouldn’t interfere with communications link in PCS band. “Despite the clear evidence showing that UWB devices interfere harmfully with both PCS and E911, UWB devices were not available for industry testing,” Qualcomm said. “This testing is crucial to ensure that the 1 million customers who currently use GPS-equipped wireless phones may have confidence that when they call 911 from their wireless phones, police and emergency personnel will be able to locate them accurately and precisely.” It said order and separate FCC staff analysis of Qualcomm test data “misinterpret” company’s data. Qualcomm test data showed that UWB devices would cause harmful interference in PCS band to wireless phones, making blocked calls and dropped calls more likely and creating less reliable PCS and E911 service: “Nothing in the record of this proceeding demonstrates that E911 service will be sufficiently protected indoors if UWB devices can operate only 12 dB below the Part 15 limit.”