House Commerce Chmn. Tauzin (R-La.) was critical of FCC ultra-wideband (UWB) order Wed.,, saying at Telecom Subcommittee hearing that Commission was too quick to adopt restrictions based on NTIA recommendations. He said NTIA’s concerns were based on hypotheticals that had little research backing them up. “We have an FCC order that permits a limited deployment of new technology,” Tauzin said. “NTIA determined the outcome of this proceeding, and the FCC’s order is pretty clear about that. The Commission adopted emissions limits based on levels with which NTIA was comfortable.” Tauzin said FCC had to draw conclusions on “mountains” of conflicting data, with NTIA detailing potential interference and UWB developers arguing that devices wouldn’t cause harmful interference. He said he was hopeful FCC would be able to conduct enough “real world” tests in next 6-12 months to determine whether there was “solid” evidence that UWB created harmful interference in restricted bands.

Fixed Wireless Communications Coalition (FWCC) and National Spectrum Managers Assn. (NSMA) asked FCC Wireless Bureau for blanket waiver that would allow coordination of fixed wireless licenses at narrower bandwidths than now permitted. In waiver request filed Wed., groups asked that fixed wireless service (FS) licenses at 18 GHz be allowed to undertake coordination and licensing at bandwidths of 2.5, 5, 30 and 50 MHz in addition to 10, 20, 40 and 80 MHz now allowed. “The sole purpose of the waiver is to eliminate the present need for FS users to coordinate and license more spectrum than they actually need,” request said: “Grant of the waiver will improve efficient use of the spectrum and will not adversely affect any user.” Groups said they wanted blanket waiver -- not rulemaking -- “because rapidly growing spectrum congestion has created an urgent need for relief.” FWCC and NSMA said if Commission decided to move ahead with rulemaking anyway, they wanted blanket request granted while rulemaking process was under way. “This alternative will provide the fixed service with the immediate relief it needs,” request said. Before FCC partitioned 18 GHz band between fixed wireless and fixed satellite service, Part 101 of FCC rules allowed fixed wireless bandwidths of 5, 6, 10, 20, 40, 80 and 220 MHz, request said. After reallocation, however, narrowest channels available only to fixed wireless are 10 MHz. Because some fixed wireless operators can operate well in channels as narrow as 2.5 MHz, “assigning a full 10 MHz to each is a waste of badly needed spectrum,” FWCC and NSMA said. They said FCC had agreed rechannelization could aid relocation of fixed wireless service operators and had planned proceeding on issue. “While the FWCC and NSMA welcome the Commission’s commitment to address the issue in the future, the passage of time may render it moot,” they said.

FCC adopted report and order Thurs. that puts in place new service rules covering total of 27 MHz in 7 separate bands that have been reallocated from govt. to non-govt. use. More broadly, FCC officials also said at agenda meeting that agency will issue notice of inquiry (NOI) by year’s end on provision of wireless services in rural areas, topic that emerged during Commission negotiations on order. FCC Wireless Bureau Chief Thomas Sugrue said at press briefing after meeting that NOI will be fairly wide-ranging, touching on topics such as roadblocks and opportunities for provision of wireless service in rural areas, as well as auctioning and licensing policies. Order itself covers service and licensing rules for wide range of bands, including ways to continue protecting wireless medical telemetry service at 1.4 GHz. FCC Comr. Copps dissented in part on item, expressing concerns about spectrum rights given to band managers, which Chmn. Powell later defended as part of Commission’s purview. In lengthy separate statement, Copps also voiced concern that FCC shouldn’t rely on spectrum partitioning and disaggregation to help promote service in rural areas until it receives better data on how these tools are working.

Maritime Telecommunications Network (MTN) asked FCC to protect fixed service with regulations that would govern use of satellite earth stations aboard vessels (ESVs) in fixed satellite service (FSS) networks, company said Mon. in filing. MTN, which provides commercial satellite service (video, telephony and Internet access via C-band dishes) at sea, is concerned about Commission inquiry into authorization of ESVs studying regulatory framework that would allow FS and FSS operators to operate together without harmful interference. FCC launched inquiry (IB 02-10) in Jan. on whether to set specific rules for ESVs, including appropriate regulatory status. Inquiry specifically asks whether ESV should be moved to mobile satellite service (MSS) band, and whether if they stay in FSS band Table of Frequency Allocations should be modified.

Industrial Telecom Assn. (ITA) asked FCC for additional 90 days to file reply comments on notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) soliciting feedback on ways to ameliorate public safety interference at 800 MHz. “The significant impact on the public safety, private wireless and communications industries as a result of this proceeding, as well as the volume of comments, is such that an extension of time is warranted,” ITA told FCC. It also cited substantial volume of initial comments (nearly 200) that NPRM had generated so far. Among options on which Commission has solicited comments is plan submitted by Nextel last fall that would reconfigure systems at 700, 800 and 900 MHz and 2.1 GHz, including additional spectrum for public safety. American Mobile Telecom Assn. (AMTA) said that while FCC ultimately might decide rebanding was needed to address interference, existing record wasn’t conclusive on that point. AMTA Pres. Alan Shark said his group thought that “we aren’t doing our members a service by coming up with a proposal when there is so much uncertainty about the technical underpinnings.” While much attention in proceeding has focused on Nextel White Paper last fall, Shark told us: “It’s the wrong thing to drive this.” Shark, who counts Nextel among AMTA’s members, said he would like to see 7 issues drive discussion: (1) Extent to which that was immediate problem and potential fixes to address interference at 800 MHz should address not just long-term ramifications but must “recognize that this is happening now.” (2) Need for “voluntary mediation” when public safety or private wireless enterprises find they can’t work out solution with interfering party. Neutral, 3rd parties could be part of pool in such cases that could make recommendations on fixes, Shark said. (3) Some reshuffling at 800 MHz. “Under any rebanding proposal, we need to pull something out of 800 MHz to come up with greenspace to make it happen,” he said, and process would have to account for extent to which equipment moves in that band would need to be done in “orderly” manner. (4) Consideration of moving Nextel out of 800 MHz. Shark said that while commercial wireless operators had expressed concern about part of Nextel proposal that would give carrier spectrum at 2.1 GHz without auction, he didn’t have problem with it. “It would leave some greenspace and take out some incredible congestion.” (5) Examination of filtering aspects of new equipment to address radiofrequency interference “on the front end.” (6) Longer term strategy that could include moving all of public safety at 700 MHz, although several conditions would be needed. Key would be to have date certain by which analog broadcasters would vacate spectrum as part of DTV transition, he said. Another condition would be postponement of current date for 700 MHz auction, which AMTA supports, Shark said. Another caveat would be that relocated operators would be given assurances equipment would be available for them in new band. (7) Guarantees of reimbursement for relocating incumbents. Shark said there was need for congressionally mandated national emergency telecom that could address that issue.

FCC established new out-of-band emission limits for certain mobile earth station terminals (METs) used for Mobile Satellite Service (MSS) communications in report and order (R&O) released Wed. Restrictions apply to METs operating in 1610-1660.5 MHz band and METS in 1990-2025 MHz. Commission said it was imposing limits to prevent METS from interfering with aeronautical reception of satellite radionavigation signals in 1559-1610 MHz band. Specifically, limits are designed to improve flight safety by ensuring that emissions from METS won’t impair aircraft radionavigation during instrument approach and landing.

House Telecom Subcommittee ranking Democrat Markey (Mass.) is circulating draft bill that would create trust fund for digital technology grants out of future wireless auction proceeds. Draft bill also would allocate spectrum for advanced wireless services while keeping intact Bush Administration proposal for separate trust fund for govt. relocation proceeds for incumbent users that may be relocated from spectrum. Markey’s proposal, which panel of industry and academic experts at New America conference said Fri. has bipartisan backing, would reserve first $5 billion derived from applicable spectrum auctions to reimburse Dept. of Defense and other govt. agencies for vacating various spectrum bands. Rest of auction proceeds would be deposited into separate trust fund to provide grants for educational broadband technology and deployment projects, making those funds available to entities currently eligible for universal service funding. Up to $300 million from such grants would be made available annually to public TV stations to upgrade analog stations to digital. Markey is expected to introduce bill this week and Sen. Dodd (D-Conn.) is said to be drafting somewhat broader companion bill that also has bipartisan backing.

Work on U.S. draft proposal for World Radio Conference (WRC) 2003 that would create international identification of public safety spectrum has been slowed by continued opposition of U.S. military over one band, sources said. Sustained DoD opposition to use of 380-400 MHz, historically used by NATO for global operations, contributed to Motorola’s recent withdrawal from one of lead roles in drafting U.S. proposal in that area. Still under consideration are 700 MHz and 4.9 GHz, both allocated in U.S. for public safety, but NATO band already designated in Europe for public safety interoperability appears to be off table in U.S., several sources said. Steve Sharkey, dir.-spectrum & standard strategies for Motorola, said 700 MHz and 4.9 GHz are “great bands” for U.S. to back for international harmonization for public safety. But as to key objective in crafting U.S. position on spectrum harmonization in this area, he said: “We have been frustrated in not being able to achieve that and that is one of the reasons that we have decided to use our resources elsewhere.”

Echoing legal concerns raised by FCC Chmn. Powell over 700 MHz auction earlier in week, FCC Comr. Abernathy said Fri. that “absent a statutory change, I believe it is responsible for the FCC to move forward with the auction of this band before the end of the year.” Speaking to reporters after speech at World Computer & Internet Law Congress in Washington, Abernathy didn’t rule out “very brief” temporary delay to give Congress time to weigh in on statutory deadline of Sept. 30, 2002, for lower portion of the band. “It’s a very difficult situation,” she said. “The question for us is how do you explain not following a statutory mandate.”

Office of Management & Budget’s Office of Information & Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) said it would intensify reviews of regulatory costs and benefits and would continue to develop “transparent and open approach to regulatory oversight” to “demystify” process. It said late last week in draft of its annual report to Congress that in assessing federal department and independent agency rulemakings, it found FTC and FCC contrasted sharply in degree to which they provided financial impact data. Basing conclusion primarily on General Accounting Office reports, OMB said FTC “consistently considered benefits and costs in their rulemaking processes while [FCC] did not prepare benefit-cost analyses.”