Martin Allows Three More Days to Lobby FCC on White Space Rules
Parties got three more days to make their case for or against the proposed white spaces order -- until 5:30 p.m. Friday. The commission cut off lobbying Tuesday night on the other items scheduled for votes at the Nov. 4 meeting. But the extension could be bad news for broadcasters. Chairman Kevin Martin agreed to allow additional time, we've learned, at least partly at the urging of Google CEO Larry Page, who wanted the FCC to consider his company’s request to permit higher power levels for devices that use the white spaces.
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.
Delaying the start of the sunshine period caught other commissioners and their staff off guard, FCC officials said. An official said other commissioners were “blind sided” and none of the offices were consulted ahead of time. The FCC rarely extends the start of the sunshine period.
The FCC cut off further lobbying on proposed intercarrier compensation and Universal Service Fund revisions, Verizon Wireless’ proposed purchase of Alltel and the proposed Sprint Nextel-Clearwire WiMAX partnership. A wireless industry lobbyist said the crowds waiting on the eighth floor Monday and Tuesday to speak with commissioners and their staff before the cutoff resembled the reception at the FCBA Chairman’s Dinner.
A probable subject of late discussions at the FCC is Google’s proposal that the commission consider a more detailed approach to adjacent-channel power limits than proposed in the order on circulation. The power limits in the draft order would limit the usefulness of the white spaces, the company said. Google said that in Boston, for example, only two channels would be available under proposed limits, versus seven under its variable power proposal. In Chicago, none would be available, compared with three under its plan. In Houston and Los Angeles, the difference would be one channel versus 11 in each city.
“At minimum, would-be broadband WiFi providers should have a future opportunity to rebut the presumption that a fixed power level is sufficiently granular, and that power levels above 40 mW would be harmful,” Google said.
But the delay also gives broadcasters more time to make their case that the FCC should seek comment on an Office of Engineering and Technology report on white spaces interference before completing action on rules for the band. A broadcasting official said commissioners haven’t had a chance to consider the white spaces because they've been dealing with other agenda items.
Any rules allowing the use of unlicensed white spaces devices “must be crafted carefully,” five DTV set makers told the commission in a letter Tuesday. LG, Panasonic, Mitsubishi, Samsung and TTE, which makes RCA sets, want the commission to base its rules on the “concrete data” in the OET report that found unlicensed devices “can and will cause harmful interference to DTV receivers,” they said.
“Any devices that rely solely on spectrum sensing would threaten substantial interference,” the manufacturers said. Though the OET report’s “summary conclusion” says otherwise, the information in the 400-page document confirms there’s no “proof of concept” that spectrum sensing works “reliably and accurately” to determine whether a TV channel is occupied or vacant, they said. So building geolocation technology into the devices “is necessary to protection digital television channels from harmful interference,” the manufacturers said.
DTV makers and others long have “documented” that DTV reception will be hurt if unlicensed devices, including those with geolocation technology, are allowed to operate at power levels above 5 mW on a station’s first-adjacent channel, as has been proposed, the companies said. They also think the proposed 40 mW power level on first-adjacent channels to TV stations and the 100 mW level proposed for the remaining adjacent channels “will cause harmful interference” to cable TV viewing.