Radar detector industry petitioned FCC Fri. for partial reconsideration of decision that required those devices to meet Part 15 limits on emissions in 11.7-12.2 GHz band. While saying they agreed with order’s technical provisions (CD July 22 p1), group of 6 radar detector manufacturers argued that implementation schedule was “infeasible, unprecedented and unnecessary.” Commission required that radar detectors made domestically or imported into U.S. comply with new technical rules starting 30 days after publication in Federal Register. All radar detectors marketed in U.S., including those sold at retail, must start compliance within 60 days of that publication. Members of Radio Assn. Defending Airwave Rights (RADAR) instead want FCC to require compliance by Dec. 31 “and that the distribution pipeline be left to empty at its own speed.” If Commission still decides to require date for retail compliance, RADAR proposes July 1, 2003, deadline. Current timelines could “shut down” industry, it warned. Rules were designed to prevent interference to VSATs that had been traced to radar detectors. Petition for more time for compliance drew sharp criticism from Satellite Industry Assn. (SIA) Fri., with Exec. Dir. Richard DalBello saying he was “flabbergasted” by request.

Bush Administration Tues. released long-awaited 3G viability assessment under which Defense Dept. agreed to clear most of 1710-1755 MHz but said freeing additional 15 MHz beyond that was untenable between now and 2008. Result is that report finds way to clear 90 MHz of spectrum for advanced wireless services at 1.7 GHz and in 45 MHz of 2110- 2170 MHz, which is occupied by nongovt. users. That’s less than 120 MHz that NTIA and other Executive Branch agencies had left on table last fall for 3G evaluation, after taking 1770-1850 MHz occupied by DoD out of consideration following Sept. 11 attacks (CD Oct 9 p3). While spectrum is less than originally sought by industry, private sector and govt. officials at Commerce Dept. briefing touted outcome as providing certainty that allocation decisions and auction could be held in 2004-2005 time frame. Also Tues., Commerce Dept. released draft bill to create spectrum relocation fund to pay incumbent govt. users for relocating and modernizing equipment. Commerce Secy. Donald Evans said 3G assessment strikes “a necessary balance between our country’s economic growth and national security, as well as public safety.”

Citing instances of harmful interference to VSATs that have been traced to radar detectors, FCC ordered Fri. that those devices meet Part 15 limits on emissions in 11.7-12.2 GHz band. Rules also require that radar detectors obtain certification under FCC’s equipment authorization procedures and that all of those devices marketed in U.S. comply within 60 days after rules are published. Previously, receivers that tuned above 960 MHz had been exempt from Part 15 limits because they typically hadn’t caused interference to authorized services. Commission said rule changes were prompted by instances of radar detectors’ interference to VSATs that were confirmed by FCC lab tests. By setting Part 15 limits for those devices, order turned down arguments of some in satellite industry that had sought more stringent emissions requirements below Part 15 levels, but industry appeared pleased that new Part 15 limits were being imposed. At same time, order outlined aggressive implementation schedule that required all radar detectors marketed in U.S. meet new emission limits quickly.

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.