BROAD COALITION URGES FCC NOT TO MOVE DIRECTLY TO UWB RULE

Letter is latest event in UWB proceeding that has generated reams of technical information -- and charges and countercharges of potential interference concerns -- for FCC to filter. While UWB developers have questioned some of conclusions drawn from NTIA test results in GPS and non-GPS bands, they generally have said research to date had confirmed compatible operation of their devices with existing services. FCC proposal approved last year, which considers allowing operation of UWB technology on unlicensed basis, was viewed as balancing act between allowing technology development to proceed while remaining mindful of interference concerns of GPS operators. But pending proposal has drawn particular interest from aviation community, which repeatedly has raised concerns about UWB impact on GPS systems used for air traffic navigation. Letter sent to Powell shows wider net of concern, as well, from wireless industry, equipment makers, satellite radio operators and others.

Coalition letter to Powell turns on concerns that agency will release final rule on UWB devices operating in Part 15 spectrum before more detailed proposal is out for comment. Referring to “preliminary and incomplete nature” of information before Commission, letter said “it has come to our attention that the FCC may be considering as its next procedural step the adoption of a final order.” Other signatories include Air Transport Assn. of America, ARINC, Astrolink International, Ellipso, Garmin International, LocatorNet, Magellan Corp., Metricom, Motient Services, National Assn. for Amateur Radio, Navsys Corp., Omnistar, Outreach, Rockwell Collins, SiRF Technology, Sirius Satellite Radio, Spatial Technologies Industry Assn., Trimble Navigation, XM Radio.

Further NPRM is required “as a matter of fairness” and under Administrative Procedure Act (APA), companies and trade groups told Powell. Otherwise, parties can’t participate “meaningfully in the rulemaking process” and final rule “is reversible,” joint filing said. Letter said NPRM was ambiguous and general because it didn’t spell out proposed text of rule and didn’t reach tentative conclusions in most cases. For example, letter said, it didn’t address parameters of UWB definition, power limits, types of modulation, permitted bands of operation. Companies said that in establishing NPRM comment cycle, agency acknowledged further test results would be forthcoming on potential impact of UWB. “The Commission has created the distinct risk that interested parties will have to confront possibly harmful rules, factual assumptions or critical data for the first time when the final rule is proposed” in violation of APA, letter said. Coalition said FCC hadn’t been given evidence that “precipitous” action was needed to adopt final rules.

FCC should ensure that wide range of interests is “given an opportunity to comment on something far more concrete than has occurred to date,” companies said. Letter took aim at what companies described as shortcomings of research so far. Citing NTIA study on impact of UWB on federal non-GPS operations, preliminary results made clear “the need for more study before the Commission acts,” letter said. “The study confirmed, however, that UWB devices need to be regulated differently than Part 15 devices if existing radio operations are to be adequately protected,” companies told FCC. They wrote that adequate measurement and analysis of impact of UWB devices on other users of spectrum hadn’t been done yet, but “even the limited tests to date show significant harmful interference.” Sectors affected by rules on UWB devices include satellite radio operators, GPS device developers, aeronautical and marine navigation, Enhanced 911 systems, wireless operators, fixed satellite earth stations, broadcasters and air traffic control, letter said.

Shortcomings of NPRM, letter contended, include: (1) Lack of definition for UWB devices in question. (2) Failure to fully measure impact on existing incumbent users. (3) Lack of determination of bands of operation, emission limits or other regulatory provisions needed to support UWB deployment in way that protects other users.

NTIA issued test results earlier this month assessing potential impact of UWB devices in GPS bands (CD March 12 p1). Report didn’t make policy recommendations to FCC but raised questions about potential scenarios in which UWB would be used for high-data rate applications in that spectrum. Results appeared to raise fewer concerns about UWB applications at lower pulse rates, such as those used for ground-penetrating radar. Earlier this year, NTIA reported mixed results on tests of UWB in non-GPS band. That assessment cited potential for technology to operate in 3-6 GHz range without interference but said there were operating challenges below 3 GHz. Another test result that Commission must sort through is analysis by Johns Hopkins U. Applied Physics Lab of UWB and GPS interaction. That study was funded by UWB developer Time Domain, which said it gave total editorial control to researchers. Time Domain praised analysis, saying it showed UWB had no more effect on GPS receivers than devices that complied with FCC’s Part 15 rules. Other test results before FCC include research by Qualcomm.