In frank outline of his antitrust views, new Justice Dept. Antitrust Chief Charles James said he didn’t see his job as working to assure large numbers of competitors in particular industries, nor to automatically stop a company from developing market dominance. Speaking at Practising Law Institute conference in Washington, James indicated his views didn’t signal laissez-faire approach, but he believed in analyzing mergers, Sec. 271 applications and other reviews on case-by-case basis taking into account changing industries. James’s comments appeared to warm hearts of business representatives in audience. “I think I'll quote him in filings with the FCC,” one attorney joked.

FCC Comr. Abernathy stressed role that wireless spectrum plays in homeland security, in speech Tues. to Conference on Homeland Defense in Washington. She cited “serious interference issues” that exist between public safety and commercial wireless operators in 800 MHz band. Recent spectrum swap proposal floated at agency by Nextel (CD Nov 23 p1) offers “one possible solution,” although Abernathy said she didn’t necessarily back that plan: “It is my hope that the FCC can promptly generate an NPRM that looks at the interference issues at 800 and outlines various possible solutions… This is particularly important in that consolidation of public safety licensees in the 800 MHz band also offers the potential to expand on our ongoing efforts to create some national interoperability bands and provides additional spectrum for public safety.” At press breakfast earlier Mon., Abernathy said she expected that NPRM would examine broader set of potential solutions than one proposed by Nextel. Nextel proposal would realign frequencies at 700, 800 and 900 MHz, giving public safety users access to 20 MHz of contiguous spectrum in lower 800 MHz band. While public safety officials have given warm reception to plan, private wireless users have expressed concern over issues such as how they would be compensated for relocation. Other questions have involved giving Nextel spectrum, under plan in which it would pay up to $500 million for public safety users to relocate but wouldn’t pay for spectrum they were receiving. Instead, plan would involve swap for bands they are giving up at 800 MHz and elsewhere. “Significant concerns have been raised about the idea of ‘compensatory’ spectrum being provided from the 2 GHz MSS bands, and I will need to look more closely at the record regarding our approach to incumbent private wireless operators in the band, particularly that spectrum used by critical infrastructure licensees,” Abernathy said: “But the bottom line is that the interference issues at 800 MHz need to be solved, and Nextel, to its credit, offered one possible solution.” Under its plan, Nextel would swap 4 MHz in 700 MHz band, 8 MHz of specialized mobile radio spectrum at 800 MHz and 4 MHz in 900 MHz band. Nextel then would receive 6 MHz in upper 800 MHz band and 10 MHz in 2.1 GHz band. As for 24 MHz set aside for public safety in Ch. 60-69 spectrum, Abernathy said FCC faced constrained options for expediting exit of analog TV broadcasters out of that band: “Although I understand the concerns raised about paying broadcasters to move, I continue to believe that, based on our existing statutory authority and the limited options available, a policy that promotes voluntary commercial transactions to clear this band is the best approach.” She also said proposal for globally identified public safety bands was on agenda at 2003 World Radio Conference (WRC). “If the WRC is to designate international public safety bands, I believe it is essential that the 60-69 band be at least one of the ones identified.” Abernathy said she supported “flexible approach” to pending waiver requests at FCC from VoiceStream and Verizon Wireless on wireless priority access service (PAS). Agency may need to take another look at its PAS rules if waiver requests reflect potential shortcomings, she said. “These are difficult issues,” she said, citing questions such as how priority access interacted with Enhanced 911. “And what other spectrum management issues are implicated? We should not keep rules on the books if they don’t make sense and if we receive a constant flow of waiver requests that may indicate a need for changes.” Carriers and govt. users still are “feeling their way” on best approach to PAS, she said.

Despite move by FCC to put ultra-wideband (UWB) order on agenda for Dec. 12 meeting (CD Dec 6 p8), chances that item will be approved then are seen as slim, industry observers said Thurs. Sources have indicated that in areas of UWB policy where federal agencies can’t reach agreement, Commission will allow more time beyond Dec. 12 for coordination on final item. Commerce Secy. Donald Evans told FCC Chmn. Powell Nov. 30 that additional 60 days were needed to complete final analysis to ensure protection of critical govt. operations and safety of life services. “This additional time seems eminently reasonable given the stakes of the proceeding and the high demands placed on our national defense and transportation agencies during this extraordinary time in our nation’s history,” Evans said in letter obtained by Communications Daily. Sen. Burns (R-Mont.) wrote to Powell Dec. 4 citing “significant alarm” raised by aviation industry on impact of UWB interference with “critical” safety-of-flight operations. “Potential interference with aviation operations is entirely unacceptable in light of recent aviation tragedies,” Burns wrote.

Deputy Defense Secy. Paul Wolfowitz asked Commerce Secy. Donald Evans to advocate delay in final regulatory decision on ultra-wideband (UWB) until “at least February.” Expectation of some industry observers had been that UWB could be taken up at FCC’s Dec. 12 agenda meeting, although timing was unclear because NTIA still must submit final input to FCC on rulemaking, sources said. FCC Chmn. Powell told House Appropriations Subcommittee earlier this year that Commission could issue UWB rulemaking by year-end, although he said at time that agency was awaiting final evaluation from govt. on UWB interference issues (CD May 23 p7). In letter to Evans last week, Wolfowitz said DoD’s review of preliminary draft of FCC’s UWB rules “indicates they will not provide adequate protection for GPS and other critical DoD systems… They also raise significant national spectrum management policy issues such as the intentional operation of nonlicensed devices in nationally restricted bands and in internationally designated passive-only bands.” Several sources said item on UWB began circulating on 8th floor at FCC earlier this week.

As part of proposed spectrum swap with public safety users, Nextel asked FCC to put rule changes in place in next 6 months, including assigning 10 MHz of mobile satellite spectrum to carrier. In White Paper submitted to FCC last week and made public Tues., Nextel cited critical spectrum needs that public safety community faced following Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Public safety community, in turn, offered support, contingent on funds’ being provided to cover all implementation costs that such licensees would face. Nextel has pledged to provide up to $500 million for equipment retuning and other transition expenses. “The Nextel proposal is a major step in the right direction,” said Nov. 21 letter to FCC Chmn. Powell from Assn. of Public-Safety Communications Officials-International (APCO), International Assn. of Fire Chiefs, International Assn. of Chiefs of Police, others. Proposal would realign frequencies at 700, 800 and 900 MHz and 2.1 GHz and more than double public safety’s current allocation of 9.5 MHz of noncontiguous spectrum at 800 MHz (CD Nov 23 p1).

Nextel made proposal at FCC Wed. for spectrum swap that would realign frequencies at 700, 800 and 900 MHz bands, in part by more than doubling public safety’s current allocation of 9.5 MHz of noncontiguous spectrum at 800 MHz. Nextel said proposal, text of which it hadn’t made available by our deadline, would separate channel blocks used by cellular and other wireless providers from of public safety systems. As we reported earlier, public safety users would have access to 20 MHz of contiguous spectrum in lower 800 MHz band, prospect that some public safety officials have lauded because it would align that spectrum with public safety spectrum at 700 MHz (CD Nov 19 p4). Under white paper submitted to Commission, Nextel said it would exchange 16 MHz of its spectrum to make realignment work. It would swap 4 MHz in 700 MHz band, 8 MHz of specialized mobile radio spectrum in lower noncontiguous channels of 800 MHz and 4 MHz of spectrum at 900 MHz. To pave way for public safety users to implement proposal, Nextel said it would contribute up to $500 million to cover re-tuning costs that incumbent users would face.

In latest twist in debate over how FCC should set forth policy on ultra-wideband (UWB) devices, coalition of companies and trade groups has submitted new proposal to Commission. Proposal, drafted by groups that have expressed concerns about potential interference of UWB to GPS and other systems, urges FCC to: (1) Permit UWB ground penetrating radar applications below 1 GHz with licensing rules “appropriate for unintended emissions.” (2) Permit UWB communication devices between 6 and 12 GHz and automotive collision radar devices between 17 and 24 GHz. (3) Bar commercial use of UWB devices between 1 and 6 GHz. (4) Restrict out-of-band emissions to levels that don’t interfere with current authorized services, particularly GPS. (5) Develop expedited licensing plan for UWB devices. (6) Allow public comment before any new regulations are adopted. (7) Allow experimental uses of UWB devices under current FCC rules. Coalition includes Air Transport Assn. of America, American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, Lockheed Martin, Qualcomm, Sirius Satellite Radio, United Airlines, U.S. GPS Industry Council, WorldCom, XM Satellite Radio. Groups set out position to FCC Chmn. Powell in Nov. 15 letter that expanded on earlier proposals that UWB be authorized on category-by-category basis, with latest letter expanding on how those categories should be defined. Communications devices operating between 6 and 12 GHz wouldn’t lend themselves to “individual licensing scheme” because of large numbers of such devices, group said. “Equally, certification of compliance with the existing FCC Part 15 approach is not appropriate because testing to date has shown that UWB devices have characteristics that vary greatly from those of unintentional emitters.” FCC should address that category of devices in further notice of proposed rulemaking, group argued. Letter also calls for “further step” in which UWB manufacturers would apply for registration of each new type of device, including antenna design or other “significant changes” in design specifications. Applications would be placed on public notice, with comments accepted on technical interference, demonstration of aggregate effect on noise floor, consistency with applicable technical standards. “There would be an expedited procedure for Commission consideration and approval, and approved applications would go into a Commission-maintained ‘register,'” groups said.

BeamReach Networks said it received national experimental license in wireless communications service (WCS) band 2.3 GHz. License covers 2 bands of 15 MHz in that spectrum and will let BeamReach operate trials of its broadband wireless access system anywhere in U.S. BeamReach CEO Robert Kelsch said: “Trials will clearly demonstrate the performance of our system in delivering concurrently the largest coverage and the highest spectral efficiency both in supercell and in multicell environments.” BeamReach said its system targeted all frequencies below 6 GHz, including MMDS and Instructional TV Fixed Service spectrum and 3.5 GHz. Company said it was demonstrating technology in relatively narrow WCS band, which it called one of most “challenging,” to show system could work “in every band.”

Govt. analysis of how to obtain additional spectrum for 3rd generation wireless services appears to be veering -- for now -- away from entire 1755-1850 MHz band occupied by Defense Dept. systems, several sources said. Part of what is driving renewed interest in searching more intensely for 3G spectrum elsewhere is Sept. 11 terrorist attacks that have made it easier for DoD to fend off efforts to relocate its systems, sources said. But industry observers indicated that even before attacks, momentum was building for looking at other bands, with recent FCC order removing MMDS systems from relocation consideration for 3G providing increased impetus. One govt. official said interagency talks had yielded no final decision and situation still was fluid. Agency and industry officials involved in talks have been eyeing out-of-band pairing option that would involve 1710 to around 1770 or 1780 MHz and 2110 up to 2180 MHz. Announcement by Bush Administration on revamped 3G plan is expected as early as this week, although details still are being worked out and await final approvals at top govt. levels.

FCC released long-awaited order that added mobile allocation to 2500-2690 MHz band and spared MMDS and Instructional TV Fixed Service (ITFS) licensees from relocation threat posed by 3G. Item was voted on Sept. 6 before departure of Comr. Gloria Tristani, but not released until Mon. Report and order added mobile allocation “to provide additional near-term and long-term flexibility for use of this spectrum, thereby making this band potentially available for advanced mobile and fixed terrestrial wireless services,” FCC said. Chmn. Powell and Comrs. Abernathy and Martin voted for item, with Tristani and Comr. Copps dissenting on mobile flexibility language. Order acknowledged technical difficulties of sharing between fixed and mobile services in band now, but said upcoming service rules would address interference issues. In joint statement, Tristani and Copps raised strong objections to extent that addition of mobile allocation to band could pose harm to incumbent MMDS and ITFS users. “It is a rush to judgment that is not supported by evidence in this record,” they wrote. Meanwhile, CTIA expressed dismay that 2.5 GHz spectrum was taken out of running for 3G at time when spectrum capacity questions still loomed.