Enterprise Wireless Insider® Volume 9, Issue 1

More Regions Complete Rebanding

Rebanding has been completed in additional NPSPAC regions:  ID (12), KS (16), KY (17), MO (24), MT (25), Eastern Upstate NY (30) Western Upstate NY (55), WV (44), and American Samoa (64).  In addition to releasing any remaining Sprint-vacated channels below 860 MHz for use by PS entities, the FCC also determined that EB/GB (860-861/861-862 MHZ) spectrum in those regions will be available for pre-coordination as of January 13 and for filing with the FCC as of February 10.  The public notice acknowledged the pendency of the LMCC Petition proposing a 6-month priority status for incumbents to acquire this spectrum for system expansion purposes but elected to allow licensing because these regions do not include large metro areas where spectrum shortages are most pronounced.

Wild West Frequency Coordination

EWA filed comments in the same request for frequency advisory certification by EFAC, LLC on January 20 and stated that it endorsed the LMCC Reply Comments that challenged EFAC’s ability to satisfy the representativeness criterion for FAC certification. EWA also took issue with APCO’s cavalier suggestion in its comments on the subject that while chaotic frequency coordination would be disastrous on public safety frequencies, it might be tolerated in B/ILT pools where it could or should be governed by a “Wild West” frequency coordination process. EFAC requested to be certified as both a B/ILT and public safety FAC.

EWA replied that in fact, the qualifications of B/ILT FACs must be maintained at the highest level since, unlike public safety FACs, “they do not assume that all systems qualify for exclusive frequency assignments. B/ILT FACs not only conduct analyses under Section 90.187 and 90.621 to determine whether the requirements for exclusivity have been satisfied, but also identify the optimal shared frequency environment. To the extent APCO periodically seeks B/ILT frequencies for its constituents when it asserts that there are no assignable public safety frequencies, it presumably would not want those licensees to be subjected to a “Wild West” coordination environment.”

Necessary Criteria for FAC Certification

The Land Mobile Communications Council (LMCC) has asked that the FCC clarify certain aspects of FAC-certification criteria because certification of an entity without an independent governance structure “would undermine the credibility of the entire frequency coordination process upon which the Part 90 spectrum is made available”. In their reply comments to a request from the Engineers Frequency Advisory Committee, LLC (EFAC) to be certified as a FAC, the LMCC points out that one of the “fundamental requirements” to be a FAC is that the organization be representative of applicants and licensees it serves, which has been “interpreted consistently” to mean that they are overseen by and responsible to the entities for whom they provide frequency coordination services.  The LMCC observes that EFAC is a “newly formed company whose members are business colleagues that collectively provide a variety of technical and engineering services”.  Therefore, the LMCC states, “Whether its FAC activities are performed entirely by FAC employees or contracted to others, the FAC governing body must be accountable for ensuring that the Commission’s standards for representativeness, non-discrimination, technical expertise, and nationwide coordination capabilities are fully satisfied.”  FACs must have a “representative governance structure that directly and independently oversees the development and implementation of all FAC-related policies and procedures”.  While EFAC, LMCC points out, has stated that they will form “advisory committees”, it appears that the members of those committees will be “chosen by the very same business partners whose activities they are supposedly overseeing”. 

Potentially an 800 MHz Mess - FCC Denies Request in a Single Day

On January 12, the LMCC requested the FCC to extend the “Pre-coordination” and “FCC Application” filing deadlines by 120 days for Expansion Band (EB) and Guard Band (GB) spectrum in NPSPAC regions where the 800 MHz band Reconfiguration process rebanding has been completed. These dates were announced as January 13, 2015, and February 10, 2015. (See related story below.) This extension would have allowed the FACs time to finalize a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) necessary to accommodate instances of mutually-exclusive applications, a very real possibility, given that over three hundred applications have been filed pursuant to the “Pre-Coordination” date seeking nearly 1,500 800 MHz channels.   However, on January 13, 2015, the FCC denied the LMCC’s request stating, “[W]ithout evidence of potential harm, we are unable to conclude that the LMCC has satisfied the stay criteria.”

In a separate letter submitted on January 13, 2015, EWA suggested further to the FCC that without a dedicated MOA governing the Expansion Band and Guard Band, any applications for those channels submitted to the FCC for processing would be defective since it would have been impossible to coordinate them without an MOA in place. Perhaps hoping that there will not be any MXed applications, the FCC has not responded to EWA’s letter with the same pace as it did responding to the original LMCC letter. We doubt that will respond at all at this point.  The LMCC will be meeting on January 29th to potentially address this issue.

Of note, when the FCC announced the availability of this spectrum, they specifically stated specifically, “… we may impose a temporary freeze on the acceptance of Expansion and/or Guard Band applications in the event there is an inordinately large number of applications that would compromise the availability of adequate spectrum resources for applicants with bona fide intentions to offer service.”

EWA is unsure whether the FCC will follow its own advice.

EWA Submits Medical Body Area Network Proposal

EWA submitted a proposal to the FCC  to be named as a database coordinator of the Medical Body Area Network (MBAN) Service.  MBAN devices are licensed on a secondary basis in the 2360-2390 MHz band which is shared with Aeronautical Mobile Telemetry (AMT) operations.  MBAN devices permit wireless networking of multiple body transmitters used for measuring and recording physiological parameters and other patient information or for performing diagnostic or therapeutic functions, and are used primarily in over U.S. 5,700 health care facilities. 

Excessive Signal Booster Regulations Should Be Eliminated

EWA filed comments recommending that the personal use restriction be eliminated for provider-specific consumer signal boosters.  The consumer who installed the device must be a subscriber of that carrier, must have its consent to utilize the particular device, and must have registered its use with the carrier.  Under those circumstances, EWA stated that whether the consumer uses the signal booster only for his/her own “personal use” activities is irrelevant, however that term might be defined. EWA suggested to the FCC that it should remove the personal use restriction for carrier-specific consumer signal boosters.

900 MHz PEBB Initiatives

EWA and Pacific DataVision, Inc. (PDV) joined other industry participants on Monday, January 12 responding to the Federal Communication Commission’s (FCC) request for comments to the EWA/PDV Petition for Rulemaking regarding realignment of 900 MHz spectrum, which the FCC placed on Public Notice November 26, 2014. These comments are the first formal step in the FCC’s process of determining whether to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking that would structure the rules governing the proposed realignment of the 900 MHz band. Mark Crosby, EWA President stated, “The comments filed by incumbent licensees  this week contain few surprises since EWA and PDV have been working for over a year with representatives from critical infrastructure industries (CII) to craft a broadband proposal and listening to their concerns. Support for a new broadband opportunity below 1 GHz, voiced even by incumbents with the most apprehension, suggests to me that the industry has sufficient incentive to continue the detailed process of evaluating the best way of handling realignment.”

EWA and PDV met earlier with Ms. Renee Campbell, advisor to FCC Chairman Wheeler to discuss the history of the 900 MHz band and the proposal to realign the 5/5 MHz band to accommodate build-to-suit broadband systems. Ex Parte Presentation

On January 15, EWA and PDV hosted a webinar to present fundamental facts about the petition, and to address ten of the more common myths and misconceptions surrounding the petition. Nearly 200 industry representatives attended the webinar. If you missed the webinar, you may access the presentation slides and recording (audio and slides) on EWA’s website. EWA members are encouraged to follow further developments by participating in the member only, bi-weekly Regulatory Teleconferences.

Reply Comments are due on January 27, 2015.

Always a Bad Choice – Ignoring the Enforcement Bureau

A Union County, Florida licensee has been directed to delete 155.985 MHz from their licensed radio system (WQPL308) as directed by the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (PSHSB) in order to resolve an ongoing interference issue with Baker County Emergency Services which operates on the adjacent frequency 155.9775 MHz at a site 37.1 miles away. Under Commission rules, frequency 155.985 MHz is a mobile-only frequency, but may be assigned for base station use on a secondary, non-interference basis. Since Union County was unwilling to discuss the interference problem with even the PSHSB staff, the FCC modified to license to delete 155.985 MHz. Of course, if Union County does not cease operating on this channel, more rigorous enforcement solutions may be executed.