Enterprise Wireless Insider, Volume 12, Issue 10

Expand Eligibility and Spectrum Management of 4.9 GHz

On August 6, 2018, the Enterprise Wireless Alliance (EWA) filed Reply Comments in the 4.9 GHz proceeding concerned with user eligibility and spectrum management requirements. In its filing, EWA reminded the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that it has been a strong proponent of critical infrastructure industry (CII) access to the 4.9 GHz band as consistent with the need to make appropriately intensive use of all spectrum resources and continued to oppose commercial access.  Public safety’s utilization of this band over the past decade and a half appears to be more robust than recognized by the FCC, and its plans may be ambitious, but this 50 MHz allocation can and should support additional primary uses. EWA has recommended not only that a somewhat expanded definition of CII have co-equal eligibility but also that the assignment of spectrum within this allocation be managed by entities that have demonstrated to the FCC the technical and financial capability of carrying out that function. 

EWA focused on this last issue given public safety’s unanimous suggestion that only public safety frequency coordinators have the expertise and in-depth knowledge to manage the band in the future.  We countered that the policies governing the current Part 90 frequency coordination process have been in place since 1958 and were formalized in 1986.  The capabilities that caused the FCC to deem an organization qualified to perform coordination functions in 1969 and even in 1986 bear little resemblance to today’s requirements and offer no assurance that an organization is prepared to handle what the public safety community itself expects to be exceedingly complex technical analyses at 4.9 GHz. The fact that some, or even perhaps all, users will be public safety entities does not mean that only a public safety FAC can conduct effective frequency coordination.  For that reason, EWA strongly supports the Commission’s proposal to require entities that wish to coordinate applications in this band to submit their quali

T-Band Traction

On August 2, Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) with co-sponsors Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Bob Casey (D-Penn.), and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) introduced S.3347, entitled “Don’t Break Up the T-Band Act of 2018.” The bill, like its House counterpart (H.R. 5085), would repeal section 6103 in Title VI of P.L. 112-96, a provision of the 2012 Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act, which directs the FCC to begin an auction of the T-band spectrum (470–512 MHz) by February 21, 2021, and clear public safety operations from the band within 2 years of auction close. The House version of the bill now has bi-partisan support by 19 co-sponsors.  EWA is seeking members to lobby Senators for support of the bill. (PS 13-42)

On August 6, EWA met with representatives from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to discuss challenges in relocating public safety users from the T-Band spectrum and similarly, how Business/Industrial Land Transportation (B/ILT) users will be affected by a T-Band spectrum auction. Through this discussion, GAO is gathering critical information for the benefit of Congress as it considers the effects of repurposing the T-Band. As requested by GAO, EWA provided contact information for B/ILT licensees in a few sample markets that will be affected directly by the auction.

The Wireless Telecommunications Bureau and PSHSB have not responded to the request by the Land Mobile Communications Council (LMCC) to relax the T-Band application freeze to allow incumbents to relocate/add sites without regard to their current contours and to relocate, exchange, and add frequencies. EWA will meet with FCC staff regarding this request later in August.

PSHSB Busy Advising Licensees on Proper Behavior

File Construction Notices on Time
On July 26, the PSHSB denied a late-filed construction notification and advised Douglas County, Wisconsin, that the fact that its microwave site “is now ready and all equipment is on-site and ready to energize” after its construction deadline did not satisfy its obligation. It advised the County to get conditional authority in the interim and file a new application. It also noted that the Petition was procedurally defective since it was not signed and verified by the applicant or signed by an attorney of record representing the applicant. (DA 18-775)

Don’t Try to Get Access During A Pending Rulemaking
The PSHSB on July 25 denied a waiver request from the City of New Britain, Connecticut, seeking access to an 800 MHz Expansion Band channel for system expansion. The Bureau concluded that granting a waiver could prejudice the pending rulemaking proceeding. It also advised the city that Sprint-vacated channels are available for its use, so waiver relief is not needed. (DA 18-769)

Similarly, on July 24, the PSHSB dismissed two applications seeking waivers of the T-Band freeze that had been filed in 2012. PSHSB denied waiver relief to the County of Union and Franklin Township/Somerset County – both of New Jersey – because it determined that neither request satisfied the waiver standard. The Bureau advised Franklin Township/Somerset County that 700 MHz narrowband spectrum was available for its use and told Union County that it could not get a waiver to locate a control station outside the 50-mile radius of its market. (DA 18-763/764) 

Changing Status is Not Like Changing Clothes 
On July 25 the PSHSB dismissed License Acquisition’s request for reconsideration of the Bureau’s denial of its request to rescind its election to be relocated to the Enhanced Specialized Mobile Radio (ESMR) band, a request submitted years after it had reaffirmed its desire to be moved to that portion of the band. The request was dismissed on procedural grounds since it had not been filed with the Secretary’s office as required by Rule Section 1.106(i). (DA 18-768)