Enterprise Wireless Insider® Volume 9, Issue 3

How Big is This Guy?

A Michigan company that manufactures small gas turbine engines was receiving identifiable voice interference on their UHF radio frequencies. The voice communications were loud and clear and appeared to be taking place within a fitness center. It was so clear in fact that the turbine manufacturer decided to start documenting the conversations. Time and again, they would clearly hear the name of a particular employee of the fitness center being advised to come to the lobby to meet with a member waiting for an appointment. Armed with this information, the company decided to call each of the two local fitness centers asking to speak to that employee.  The first center informed them they did not have anyone working there with that name. However, the second center did, so the manufacturing firm had a conversation with the general manager of the center, who claimed they did hold a license for the frequencies in question. EWA was contacted by the manufacturing company to research the licensing status of the fitness center only to find they did not hold a license authorized by the FCC to operate on the frequencies as claimed. As requested, EWA filed an official interference complaint to the FCC Enforcement Bureau for action on behalf of the manufacturing firm.

Not Even in Arkansas

An Arkansas city utility started receiving interference on their VHF frequency so their radio dealer contacted EWA to conduct research to help identify the source of the interference. EWA identified the offending licensee that was providing virtually continuous remote control of farm implements. Licensed for six fixed transmitter locations in Arkansas with VHF mobiles (including remote controlled farm equipment) operating within a 40 km radius of each of those sites, the problem was likely due to the fact that 25 KHz wideband channels were still in use for voice and data purposes well past the January 1, 2013, obligation to cease using wideband systems within the VHF band. Monitoring was probably inconsistently practiced as well.  The radio dealer decided to personally approach the licensee to correct the situation, although EWA notes, that no license modification has been filed with the FCC to transition to narrowband channels.

Nasty - Unlicensed Users

For more than a decade a retirement facility located in Florida operated their UHF radio system with virtually no interference issues, until last year when it started to have its communications interrupted. Unable to identify the source of the problem, although they were receiving intelligible voice communications, the retirement facility contacted EWA for assistance. Research revealed that all co-channel licensees within a 50 mile radius of the retirement facility’s transmitter location were properly licensed and complying with FCC rules. EWA suggested that the retirement facility attempt to communicate directly with the offending party which appeared to be engaged in some sort of maintenance business. The maintenance company did not respond to requests for identification. Since the interference was becoming worse by the day, the retirement facility requested EWA to identify a new channel for their future use rather than to file a complaint with the FCC on what was likely an unlicensed user. 

$10,000 Fine for Interference and Location Violation

Alan Slater, a land mobile licensee in Mehama, Oregon was issued a $10,000 fine for operating an unlicensed 800 MHz frequency which caused interference to the Washington County Consolidated Communications Agency. Although Mr. Salter challenged that the frequency violation was unintentional and the location was authorized, the Commission upheld the fine.

Hearing Aid Compatibility (HAC)

The LMCC filed Reply Comments in response to the FCC’s Public Notice on wireless hearing aid compatibility (HAC), urging the FCC to retain the carefully considered exemption in the Twenty-First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act (“CVAA”) for the non-consumer digital handset devices that are used on private systems. Among other matters, the Public Notice asks whether the HAC rules should be extended to include handsets and customer premise equipment (CPE) used exclusively on private, internal systems such as those operated by public safety, critical infrastructure, and businesses.  

The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) also filed comments  encouraging the FCC to expand the availability of HAC-enabled devices and stated specifically:  “Broad applicability of the rule would have an added public benefit of helping to open job opportunities for people with hearing loss, some of whom are unable to obtain jobs that require use of private radios that are not HAC, such as Private Land Mobile Radio Service (PLMRS) and public safety systems used by delivery truck drivers or firefighters.”

CMRS licensees are subject to HAC obligations that require them to offer HAC-enabled handsets, depending on the number of handset models that make available on their networks.

MOU Will Address 800 MHz MXed Applications

The LMCC membership, particularly the FCC-certified frequency advisory committees, are  in the final stages of developing a Memorandum of Agreement that will accommodate mutually exclusive (MX) applications when the FCC releases for general use perhaps as many as 80 25 kHz channels within the 800 MHz Expansion Band and Guard Bands. Given thedemand for this spectrum, the opportunity to have competing applications is high, and the MOA will specify processes to address such instances. All of the certified frequency advisory committees who conduct frequency selection will be asked to become a party to the MOA, and the FCC will be asked to review the MOA before it becomes effective. The MOA will be posted on the LMCC’s web site for inspection following its execution.