Enterprise Wireless Insider® Volume 8, Issue 11

Unauthorized Operations are Still a No No

A $10,000 fine was issued to Acumen Communications of Los Angeles California for operating a land mobile station on two frequencies without proper authorization. Acumen did not respond to the FCC’s Notice of Apparent Liability and Forfeiture (NAL) regarding the violation but did concede they were operating unauthorized frequencies before the NAL was issued. The Commission reminds that “unauthorized operations undermine the Commission’s radio licensing system and potentially cause interference to licensed communications, including public safety channels”.

Lights Out Leads to $10,400 Fine

Washington Gas Light was issued a $10,400 fine for multiple violations including failing to exhibit lighting of its antenna structure, failing to immediately notify the  Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) of the lighting outage, and failing to inform the FCC on the purchase of the antenna. Washington Gas acknowledged they were not in compliance but requested a reduction in the fine based on the fact that they notified the Commission of the lighting outage before the issuance of the Notice of Apparent Liability and Forfeiture, and due to their history of compliance with the Commission. The Commission conceded only on the latter count and reduced the fine to $10,400. 

Signal Booster Vendor Claims No Harmful Interference

CellAntenna filed an ex parte letter advising the FCC that AT&T has been arbitrarily denying requests from the company and its customers to install Commission-approved Industrial Signal Boosters in various venues.  AT&T has apparently provided no justification for its denials other than a “not approved”. CellAntenna has asked that the FCC modify Section 20.21 to clarify that consent may be withheld “only based on credible concerns about harmful interference from the proposed Industrial Signal Booster.”  

Unnarrowbanding Waiver Request Denied

The FCC just now denied a June 19, 2013 (!) request from Del Norte County, California that it be permitted to “Unnarrowband” its radio system to 25 kHz channels. The County had claimed that its narrowbanded system had reduced critical coverage by 40% and that 3-5 additional towers would be needed to restore it to pre-rebanding capability.  Noting that the County had only 30,000 people and no spectrum congestion, it asked to be permitted to return to wideband operation.  Among other reasons, the FCC denied the request noting that the County would eventually experience a less reliable system and that its equipment would become obsolete.  Order

Correcting the Record Noted…But Issue Remains

In a response filing from SNG, the LMCC thanked it for correcting the record in their recent filing denying their involvement in orchestrating responses regarding RM-11719 (800 MHz Expansion/Guard Band access), and showing that the filing was promoted by the Janus Group, not SNG.  The LMCC letter noted it appreciated M2M’s effort to correct the record, however the issue remained unchanged, and when evaluating the weight that should be given to comments, the FCC should consider their origin and substance.

LMCC Conditional Licensing Rulemaking Petition Gains Support

EWA, APCO, MRFAC and the Blooston Law firm filed comments supporting LMCC’s Rulemaking Petition that would extend conditional licensing authority to entities with qualified applications in the 470-512 MHz, 806-824/851-866 MHz, and 896-901/935-940 MHz bands.  Mobile Relay Associates’ comments did not object to extension of conditional licensing authority to bands above 470 MHz but recommended certain additional conditions for all bands in light of the FCC’s failure to take appropriate enforcement action against licensees such as Acumen that abused their conditionally licensed authorizations.
 

LMCC Task Force

The first meeting of the LMCC Task Force charged with reviewing current inter-service concurrence protocols and potentially developing a revised process by which public safety eligibles may secure access to Industrial/Business spectrum took place on July 23. The fundamental issue is how public safety (PS) coordinators determine whether PS frequencies are available, primarily in the VHF band.  The PS coordinators are considering to what extent they can/will share their protocols for making that determination with the I/B coordinators.

FCC Pushes A Citizens Band Radio Service – A Citizen’s Broadband Service

Remember the early 1970s when CB was all the rage and the FCC had to open a licensing facility in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania to handle the licensing workload? To accommodate the demand then, a number of 27 MHz channels were reallocated from business services - without incumbent compensation by the way - to provide greater spectrum capacity for the CB radio craze. The FCC eventually gave up attempting to license this service, and let it go as an unlicensed service. Forty years later and over 3000 MHz removed, the FCC is now promoting a new Citizens “Broadband” Radio Service at 3550-3650 MHz, and the adjacent 3650-3700 MHz band. Unfortunately, the higher band is already significantly in play by CII and other Part 90 licensees. Déja vu all over again.

The FCC is describing the new CB service as an “innovation band” in which it intends to “explore new methods of spectrum sharing and promote a diverse array of network technologies, with a focus on relatively low-powered applications.”  EWA supports this initiative and it is yet another avenue by which the FCC hopes to address wireless coverage and capacity issues in a world where consumer demand for broadband bandwidth appears almost insatiable, demanding novel constructs for spectrum access and utilization.  However, EWA will join a number of parties who have urged that this experimental approach to spectrum management be confined at this time to the 3550-3650 MHz band and not expanded to the 3650-3700 MHz. The FCC enabled the higher band for broadband devices not that long ago, and the proposal that incumbents must scrap their investments to accommodate even newer innovations seems to EWA just a bit too aggressive. EWA will file Reply Comments in response to the FCC’s proposals and support the views of entities such as API, UTC, Southern and Sprint that have objected to the FCC’s proposal to give incumbents only five years to adapt to new but novel broadband device innovations despite the fact that current broadband investments are meeting operational requirements as originally intended by the FCC.  If the Commission chooses to proceed over industry  objections, at a minimum it should modify its rules to provide a fair opportunity for licensees in the 3.65 GHz band to derive a reasonable benefit from their equipment investments and, even more important, to protect the viability of systems that are used to serve essential public needs.