Fighting bankruptcy and Wall St. skepticism, Globalstar moved to rejuvenate company by quietly receiving experimental license for Ancillary Terrestrial Component (ATC) for 2nd- generation satellite phones that company showcased for FCC and selected members of media at Crowell & Moring law firm in Washington Thurs. Officials of FCC Wireless and International Bureau attended first-known public demonstration of ATC system. As FCC ponders use of ATC networks with Mobile Satellite Services (MSS), Globalstar believes experimental license puts it out front of competitors that include ICO and Iridium. “We done it, built it and shown it,” Chmn. CEO Olof Lundberg told us: “We have a working prototype. This gives you the best of both worlds.”

BellSouth, Nucentrix Broadband Networks, Sprint, WorldCom and Wireless Communications Assn. floated plan to FCC Thurs. for relocating Multipoint Distribution Service (MDS) licensees to make way for 3G services. U.S. govt. has been evaluating how some or all of spectrum at 1710-1770 MHz, now occupied by mostly military users, and 2110-2170 MHz could be reallocated for advanced wireless services. MDS Ch. 1 and 2 now occupy 2150-2162 MHz. While MDS industry has “strong preference” for remaining in band, licensees told FCC Chmn. Powell that proponents of relocating those incumbents hadn’t yet offered viable relocation plan. “Meanwhile, the continuing uncertainty over the future of the 2150-2162 MHz band is impeding the development of advanced MDS technology for these channels,” letter said. Companies that signed letter said proposal wasn’t perfect, but would be “acceptable compromise” if done quickly. Proposal involves: (1) Relocation of MDS Ch. 1 to 1910-1913/1990-1993 MHz and moving MDS Ch. 2/2A to 1913-1916/1993-1996 MHz bands. (2) Allocation involving 1910-1916 MHz that would allow fixed and mobile services in line with recent FCC decision allowing both uses of MDS channels at 2.5 GHz. (3) 1916-1920 MHz could be reallocated for unlicensed PCS under existing rules applicable to 1920-1930 MHz band. One trade-off to avoid introducing unacceptable interference to adjacent PCS and mobile satellite service (MSS) operations could be that MDS operators would have to give up design flexibility they have in current band, letter said. MDS operations in new bands would be subject to more stringent power and field strength limits of PCS rules and frequency stability and other requirements imposed on PCS operations, letter said. “The proponents of reallocating more spectrum for 3G win the contiguous spectrum they covet for a 1.7/2.1 GHz band pair, the MDS industry wins regulatory certainty and the public wins because the Commission will have created an environment in which new services can flourish, without any adverse impact on any incumbent stakeholder,” MDS said. Letter touted compromise solution as only “workable approach” in clearing 2150-2162 MHz for 3G. Factors that MDS operators said minimized disruptions of their plan include: (1) Fact that 1910-1916 MHz was allocated for asynchronous PCS use and there was no unlicensed PCS use of this band. (2) Extent to which 6 MHz at 1990-1996 MHz to be reallocated for MDS could be taken from 7 MHz of spectrum in 1990-2025 MHz MSS uplink band that hadn’t yet been licensed for MSS. (3) Likelihood that lower part of 1990-2026 would be “orphaned and unavailable for MSS anyway, as it is paired with 2165-2170 MHz MSS downlink band that the Commission has proposed to reallocate for 3G.” Elimination of system design flexibility for MDS licensees that would relocate under plan would avoid interference to adjacent PCS and MSS services, letter said: “As the quid pro quo for that sacrifice in flexibility, it offers the MDS industry an opportunity to escape the regulatory uncertainty that has dogged the 2150-2162 MHz band and to develop advanced services by building on existing technologies that operate near 2 GHz.”

Public safety groups and Motorola urged FCC to adopt channelization plan that could accommodate 802.11 technologies in part of 4.9 GHz recently allocated to public safety operations. But several commenters on proposal that would clear way for high-speed digital technologies for emergency communications in band differed on who should be eligible to use that spectrum beyond “traditional” public safety entities. Representing critical infrastructure providers such as utilities, United Telecom Council (UTC) said FCC should adopt eligibility definition that would include entities such as pipelines and railroads that coordinate with public safety during emergencies. However, Assn. of Public-Safety Communications Officials (APCO) backed narrower definition that would prevent fire, police and emergency medical entities from having to compete with others for that spectrum. One point of agreement across broad range of comments was that 50 MHz allocation in further notice approved by FCC in Feb. was important for homeland security, but still fell far short of spectrum needed for public safety operations.

One of major themes of new technology developers and equipment makers in comments this week sought by FCC’s Spectrum Policy Task Force has been need for more spectrum for unlicensed devices and bands for rapid testing of new technology. “Cisco believes that these ‘unlicensed’ networks have the potential to create an entirely new broadband network for all Americans,” company said. It urged FCC to allocate spectrum specifically for unlicensed data networks and called for “spectrum etiquette rules” to mitigate interference and allow for more efficient use of those bands. Among task force questions concerning Part 15 was whether types of permissible unlicensed operations should be expanded, what rule changes would be needed to accomplish that and how to put that spectrum to its highest valued use as congestion of those bands increases. FCC Chmn. Powell created the task force earlier this year to explore far- reaching spectrum policy issues, ranging from Part 15 overcrowding to whether spectrum in rural areas should be regulated differently from that in urban markets.

When granting additional flexibility for spectrum use, several wireless carriers and equipment makers urged FCC this week not to change rules in “midstream” for incumbent licensees that already had paid billions for licenses. Wireless and satellite companies, new technology developers, broadcasters and public interest groups filed close to 200 comments on questions from agency’s Spectrum Policy Task Force. Relatively high number of comments poured into Commission despite Office of Engineering & Technology’s refusal of several requests to provide extension of July 8 deadline. Public notice last month raised policy questions ranging from potential need to redefine harmful interference to whether rural spectrum should be covered under policy different from urban areas (CD June 7 p1). Some developers of emerging technologies stressed need for FCC to provide clarity in its Part 15 rules for unlicensed devices and to furnish more spectrum as demands increased. Several large carriers, including Sprint and Cingular, urged FCC to keep intact auctions of exclusive allocations and said market- based tools such as auctions worked only if license-holders had clearly defined rights.

Terrestrial carriers’ comments on integrated MSS-ATC systems were “riddled with factual and legal errors and distortions”, Globalstar said in ex parte filing. Globalstar said separate filings by AT&T wireless on April 1 and joint filing by Cingular Wireless and Sprint on proposed integration of ATC-MSS systems in 2 GHz band, L-band and 1.6- 2.4 GHz band needed to be corrected. Globalstar supports ICO proposal for flexible use by ATC and MSS licensees in all available MSS bands (CD June 17 p6). Wireless opponents have accused ICO of shrewd spectrum grab (CD May 31 p3) and asked that Commission auction spectrum sought by company. Satellite official said issue could be decided within 60 days.

At least 3 FCC proceedings could affect 2 GHz band allocations, so FCC should stay action on mandatory negotiating period for 2 GHz band relocation order, all 4 major TV networks and 6 other broadcast companies declared. Broadcasters said proceedings had created “tremendous uncertainty” about band, making it “virtually impossible to engage in any meaningful relocation negotiations.” It also said mobile satellite users hadn’t attempted to engage in “meaningful” negotiations.

BOSTON -- Attendees at Wireless Communications Assn. (WCA) show here Tues. urged FCC to update operational and technical rules for MMDS and ITFS licensees to reflect use of band that once was home to one-way video services but now is eyeing how to compete better against cable and DSL in broadband arena. “One fairly common theme I've heard from the various constituencies involved in this band is that current rules are in need of fixing, [although] they may have been a good first step at the time they were done,” FCC Wireless Bureau Chief Thomas Sugrue said. He and other officials in bureau that recently inherited all MMDS policy in FCC reorganization urged industry to provide proposal on rule changes by Sept. “I would urge you not to let it slip much beyond that, we are anxious to get going,” he said. Industry is crafting proposal that would provide rules in band that more closely resembled those for PCS, which offers flexibility for wide range of uses. Related issue raised repeatedly was how to address interleaved nature of ITFS spectrum, with several industry representatives calling for more flexibility.

Following what wireless industry called “Herculean effort” in Congress that passed legislation delaying 700 MHz auctions, FCC followed suit Wed. by postponing bidding and planning for much smaller auction this summer, as directed by Congress. After whirlwind of Senate and House votes derailed timing of lower 700 MHz auction late Tues., attention on Hill and industry turned to larger spectrum issues that new law buys extra time for policymakers to address, including proposed spectrum relocation fund, 3G viability assessment, 800 MHz reconfiguration proposals. Rep. Pickering (R-Miss.) told reporters Wed. that moving bill that would create trust fund to reimburse federal agencies that had to relocate from bands auctioned to commercial users was “achievable priority” this year. Industry sources said they also expected release shortly of viability assessment from Administration that could free up close to 90 MHz, rather than 120 MHz that industry had sought, for 3G services, with trade-off being that bands would carry assurances of being usable in relatively short term.

FCC received more than dozen petitions for reconsideration of its March ultra-wideband (UWB) order, seeking review on wide array of issues, ranging from power limits to transparency of device testing that Commission had planned over next year. Petitions reflected similar split of views that had made original proceeding controversial, including filings from numerous UWB developers that cited types of devices that couldn’t be deployed under certain provisions they argued were more restrictive than needed to protect against interference. Among companies that urged FCC to tighten certain power limits and not add flexibility to others were Sprint, Cingular Wireless, XM Radio, Sirius Satellite Radio, Satellite Industry Assn., Air Transport Assn., Qualcomm. They cited continuing interference concerns, characterizing limits of final order as insufficiently protective for systems such as GPS, PCS wireless systems, satellite radio.