Although he signed FCC filing on Transportation Dept.- funded research on ultra-wideband, Stanford U. Prof. Bradford Parkinson said he wasn’t involved in conducting study, meaning his corporate ties to GPS developer Trimble posed no conflict. In Sept. 2000, Parkinson, who is widely viewed as “Father of GPS,” jointly submitted to FCC ex parte filing with other Stanford researchers outlining preliminary results of UWB tests conducted by GPS Research Lab at Stanford and funded by DoT. “We urge the Commission to proceed with great caution and deliberation,” said filing by 4 professors, including Parkinson, that described research challenges of analyzing UWB-to-GPS interference. But Parkinson said Mon. his role in research, which had been among studies cited by federal agencies concerned about potential of UWB emissions to cause harmful interference to GPS, was to evaluate results after test phase was complete. He said Assoc. Prof. Per Enge oversaw research itself.

NTIA released report Fri. outlined need for more spectrum for critical infrastructure providers in energy, water and railroad sectors, concluding that urgency of those issues might have changed following Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Report to Congress, required by fiscal 2001 appropriations act that covered Commerce Dept., catalogued congestion that infrastructure providers faced in land mobile portion of spectrum. “It is of utmost importance that the Federal Communications Commission revisit these critical issues in order to accommodate the increasing role these industries play in maintaining quality of life,” report said. It cited continued use of spectrum as “essential to the current and future operations of these industries.” NTIA said industry feedback it received in preparing report pointed to spectrum that was “either congested or quickly approaching critical mass, thus leading to problems of interference.” NTIA said industry consensus called for additional spectrum, citing lack of bands available for new users. Report has been closely watched by private wireless industry who have raised concerns about Nextel proposal pending at FCC that would reconfigure some public safety, private wireless and commercial operators at 700, 800 and 900 MHz.

Motorola urged FCC to not delay decision on ultra- wideband, saying in ex parte filing that it was “unlikely that the Commission will gain any significant new insight into the potential of UWB to interfere by further delaying a decision.” Commission is expected to include UWB item on agenda for Feb. 14 meeting after postponing it at Dec. meeting in deference to request by Commerce Secy. Donald Evans for more time to evaluate issue. Motorola also proposed compromise for UWB limitations, saying it agreed that allowing UWB to operate at Part 15 limits above 5 GHz “while limiting UWB emissions below 5 GHz to levels that are in line with industry-developed standards for protection of services” would strike balance of interests. Motorola said Defense Dept. had backed limiting UWB operation to above 4.2 GHz and coalition of companies, including some wireless carriers, sought limitations on UWB operations to above 6 GHz. Motorola said FCC had to ensure that existing services were protected from potential interference by UWB. “This protection can only be adequately afforded by setting appropriate technical limits rather than trying to construct a complex and unenforceable regulatory structure that severely limits the operational abilities of UWB while still not ensuring adequate protection to existing services,” company said. Equipment manufacturer cited “considerable debate” in UWB docket on correct way to interpret various interference studies submitted to Commission. “One thing should be clear, however: the rights of a Part 15 user should not exceed the rights of the licensed primary user of the spectrum, nor should Part 15 operations be permitted to disrupt a carefully managed radio environment,” Motorola said. Company cited industry standards for protecting PCS services in relation to Part 15 emission limits. It said industry “finds it necessary to protect itself to a level significantly greater than what is required under the Commission’s rules.” That means FCC shouldn’t allow UWB emissions above levels that wireless industry had imposed on itself -- 16-24 dB below Part 15 levels, Motorola said. It said FCC should err on side of protecting GPS and limit emissions in GPS band to 27-35 dB below Part 15 levels, depending on type of UWB emission. Company urged Commission not to rely on “artificial regulatory constraints” such as barring peer-to-peer communications or limiting UWB use to indoors.

Ultra-wideband developer XtremeSpectrum said Fri. it supported Dept. of Defense position on UWB as laid out in letter this month to NTIA by Asst. Defense Secy. John Stenbit. He told Deputy Asst. Commerce Secy. Michael Gallagher that DoD required there be no intentional emissions below 4.2 GHz, except for imaging systems. XtremeSpectrum said it backed that caveat and had told FCC it supported DoD proposal. Company said CEO Martin Rofheart met with Sen. Warner (R-Va.) on upcoming FCC UWB decision and that Warner “pledged his support” for XtremeSpectrum and for solution that would meet concerns of both industry and govt. Rofheart said XtremeSpectrum’s proposal “more than meets all the department’s concerns regarding intentional emissions below 4.2 GHz.” He said requirement for low-power emissions in restricted bands would eliminate need for ban on communications between 2 battery-operated devices, or “peer- to-peer communications.” XtremeSpectrum described peer-to- peer networking as “key unresolved issue” before FCC in advance of Feb. 14 agenda meeting at which Commission is expected to take up UWB item. Washington attorney for XtremeSpectrum Mitchell Lazarus said ban on peer-to-peer communications as way to protect GPS and PCS systems from interference wasn’t necessary under “more flexible” solution of DoD. Rofheart described wireless peer-to-peer communications as “commercial driver” for UWB because it could deliver high data rates with lower power consumption. “If the FCC bans peer-to-peer communication for UWB by requiring a fixed, plugged-in node as part of all installations, there is no ability to leverage the low power consumption of UWB and the commercial industry will falter,” Rofheart said. Meanwhile, intense bickering over UWB continued in filings at FCC, showing how far apart some opponents remained on issue. AT&T Wireless, Cingular Wireless and Qualcomm, citing Qualcomm test results submitted to FCC this month, disputed emissions mask proposed by XtremeSpectrum that would be as low as 35 dB below certain Part 15 levels. Wireless companies said XtremeSpectrum proposal missed “fundamental point” that FCC must resolve. Carriers said tests had shown that “wireless phones suffer harmful interference as a result of transmissions from nearby UWB devices, and no private or public party, including XtremeSpectrum, the other UWB proponents and the Commission itself, has conducted any test of an emissions mask or other restriction to prove that such protective measures will successfully mitigate the harmful interference.” Wireless companies said they still urged FCC not to authorize UWB communications devices below 6 GHz. They expressed concern about critical aviation systems operating between 4.2 and 6 GHz.

NTIA submitted ultra-wideband (UWB) policy recommendation to FCC Fri. that would restrict intentional emissions below 4.2 GHz, protect radioastronomy band and restrict peer-to-peer networking of UWB devices, sources said. Emissions limits in NTIA proposal reflect several stipulations laid out by Defense Dept. in letter earlier this month to NTIA, but proposal appears to have left unresolved differences among federal agencies on what emissions limits would best protect GPS. Industry source said proposal had left officials at agencies such as Dept. of Transportation upset because their demands for higher threshold for intentional emissions of 6 GHz hadn’t been heeded in final NTIA recommendation. NTIA recommendation came in advance of UWB item that’s expected to be on agenda for Feb. 14 FCC meeting.

Private wireless users and others are lining up positions at FCC ahead of Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to address Nextel spectrum swap proposal that’s expected shortly. Raising concerns about secondary status that business licensees would have at 800 MHz under Nextel blueprint, National Assn. of Mfrs. (NAM) floated alternative spectrum reconfiguration in recent letter to FCC Chmn. Powell. Secondary status of private wireless operators “would cause major disruption and dislocation” to thousands of manufacturing operations and costs of relocating elsewhere could run into “tens of millions of dollars,” wrote NAM Pres. Jerry Jasinowski. Cost of relocation and questions about availability of adequate spectrum for private land mobile radio operators that would be displaced have been common theme of early criticism of Nextel. Motient Communications, which operates network used by BlackBerry wireless e-mail device, told Powell in letter last week that long-term effect of Nextel plan would cost company $400 million to replace subscriber equipment and network infrastructure and result would be “catastrophic.” NPRM addressing Nextel White Paper is expected out within month, source said.

FCC meeting was devoted to reports by each bureau chief on activities in last year and future plans -- and backlog reduction was mainstay of most reports. Common Carrier Bureau Chief Dorothy Attwood said pending petitions for reconsideration were down to 1/3 of last year’s level. International Bureau Chief Donald Abelson reported 55% reduction in number of applications for review and petitions for reconsideration that had been pending more than 180 days. Wireless Bureau Chief Thomas Sugrue said percent of applications and items pending more than year had dropped to 0.24% now from 13% in Dec. 1998. Enforcement Bureau Chief David Solomon reported “virtually eliminating” backlogs in some areas.

Assn. of Public-Safety Communications Officials International (APCO) warned FCC Chmn. Powell that potential ultra-wideband (UWB) interference in bands below 6 GHz posed “unacceptable” risk to public safety operations. In Jan. 16 letter released Thurs., APCO Pres. Glen Nash acknowledged that some proposed UWB operations could be useful for public safety agencies, but he told Powell: “A greater concern is that widespread unrestricted deployment of commercial UWB devices could cause harmful interference to public safety radio systems and to critical GPS-based technologies used to locate emergencies.” APCO was particularly concerned about “uncontrolled, unpredictable” UWB operations indoors. “Within buildings, low-power portable public safety radios (all of which operate below 1 GHz) may be susceptible to signal degradation caused by increased noise levels produced by UWB devices,” APCO said. Nash said that at 800 MHz, these radios already faced interference from Nextel and other adjacent cellular systems. “Adding potential UWB interference to that scenario is unacceptable,” APCO said. Group also cited concerns that potential impact of UWB signals on GPS systems could compromise accuracy of Enhanced 911 systems that relied on GPS to pinpoint location of emergency callers. “We urge the Commission to proceed with great caution in its consideration of this important issue,” Nash said. Separately, AT&T Wireless, Cingular Wireless, Qualcomm, Sprint PCS and Verizon Wireless wrote to Powell Thurs. reiterating their concerns about UWB’s impact on wireless phones, including E911. Wireless coalition cited letter earlier this week to NTIA from Asst. Secy. of Defense for Command, Control, Communications & Intelligence John Stenbit (CD Jan 15 p1). He outlined DoD’s UWB position, saying Pentagon required that there be no intentional emissions below 4.2 GHz except for imaging systems. Stenbit also acknowledged that other agencies had concerns about higher frequencies. Citing higher cutoff of 6 GHz backed by Dept. of Transportation and NASA, wireless carriers said they continued to agree with higher cutoff. Group also cited recent test results that carriers said showed harmful effect of UWB on Qualcomm’s E911 technology, gpsOne. Verizon and Sprint are rolling out that technology to meet FCC’s E911 requirements. “These tests proved that gpsOne technology incorporated into wireless phones to provide E911 service will not operate reliably or accurately in the face of UWB emissions,” letter said. “There is no basis to authorize UWB communications devices below 6 GHz.”

Asst. Defense Secy. for Command, Control, Communications & Intelligence John Stenbit spelled out Pentagon’s ultra- wideband (UWB) position for NTIA Fri., saying DoD required that there be no intentional emissions below 4.2 GHz except for imaging systems. That position, outlined in Stenbit letter to Commerce Dept.’s Deputy Asst. Secy. for Communications & Information Michael Gallagher, doesn’t reflect harder line approach of agencies such as Dept. of Transportation and NASA. Those parts of federal govt., which share DoD concerns about potential of UWB to interfere with GPS-dependent systems, still advocate no intentional emissions “below 6 GHz, period,” industry source said. DoD proposal to bar UWB emissions below 4.2 GHz, with some limited exceptions, is “a long-term position taken to protect vital DoD systems that ensure our national security,” Stenbit said in letter released Mon.: “That position is further justified by recent public reports that such initial rollouts may constitute just the ‘camel’s nose under the tent’ of commercial investment in UWB.” FCC plans to take up UWB item at Feb. 14 meeting.

FCC gave Boeing authority to operate up to 800 mobile Earth stations aboard aircraft in 14.0-14.5 GHz uplink band and 11.7-12.2 GHz downlink band. Order is conditioned on Boeing’s providing service without causing harmful interference to other services. Other conditions include: (1) Boeing, as nonconforming user, must accept any interference from any station authorized to use band. (2) Boeing can’t use system for air traffic control communications. (3) Boeing must comply with any equivalent isotropically radiated power spectral density or other limits adopted by ITU to protect other global services. (4) Boeing can’t start service in 14.0-14.5 band until coordination of Boeing’s aircraft earth stations have been successfully completed through NTIA Frequency Assignment Committee of Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee. (5) Boeing must design and operate system in accordance with its Dec. 13, 2000, technical operational coordination agreement with National Science Foundation. (6) Nonconforming use of 14.0- 14.5 GHz band can’t constrain future deployment of additional Federal Earth Stations authorized for space research service. (7) Company must comply with specific design guidelines. (8) Boeing must maintain point of contact to immediately address remedy for any harmful interference events. Contact information must be provided within 30 days. Boeing also has 30 days to decline FCC order as conditioned. Authorization would permit Boeing to expand one-way Ku-band aeronautical communication service by making available 2-way broadband connectivity to passengers and crew aboard, FCC said.