Communications Daily is a Warren News publication.

Group of companies that develop devices for Part 15 spectrum, inc...

Group of companies that develop devices for Part 15 spectrum, including ultra-wideband developer XtremeSpectrum, opposed petition to FCC for reconsideration by amateur radio group that they said “seems to call into question the lawfulness of unlicensed devices in general.”…

Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article

Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!

National Assn. for Amateur Radio (ARRL) filed petition for reconsideration in April concerning order that would allow operation of unlicensed fixed, point-to-point transmitters in 24.0-24.25 GHz band using narrow-beamwidth antennas. ARRL petition raised broad Part 15 issues, asking that Commission reverse part of order that addressed its jurisdiction to authorized unlicensed operation of radio frequency devices “which have significant potential for interference to unlicensed radio services.” ARRL argued that FCC had no jurisdiction under Communications Act to authorize through rulemaking operations unlicensed devices that had “significant potential” to interfere with licensed radio services. ARRL contended: “The Commission has expanded the concept of unlicensed devices far beyond what its original concept allowed and far beyond what is permissible pursuant to Section 301” of Communications Act. ARRL also said certain statutory provisions barred unlicensed operations, with limited exceptions. In opposition filed late Fri. at FCC, group of technology companies said ARRL’s arguments were tantamount to asking FCC to remove computers, cordless phones and “all other radio-based consumer devices” from market. Besides XtremeSpectrum, opposition was filed by Intersil, Symbol Technologies and Wireless Ethernet Compatibility Alliance. “On its face, ARRL’s objection reaches much farther than the 24 GHz rule adopted in this proceeding,” filing said. “Given that nearly all unlicensed operation in non-government spectrum uses the same frequencies as do licensed radio services, ARRL’s petition seems to call into question the lawfulness of unlicensed devices in general.” Companies said FCC had backing to implement Part 15 rules as result of: (1) “Great deference” to which Commission’s statutory interpretation is entitled. (2) Deference given to agency when it acts in line of its technical expertise. (3) Independent authority of FCC to fill in gaps in Communications Act, “particularly in a fast-moving technological environment.” (4) Repeated ratification by Congress of unlicensed operations as evidenced by lawmakers’ leaving rules intact for 60 years “while routinely amending other parts of the statute.” Opposition filing also said Congress included language in 1997 Balanced Budget Act that excluded from auction bands allocated for unlicensed use under Part 15. “ARRL thus has the difficult task of arguing that Part 15 exceeds the Commission’s statutory authority, in the face of a statute that specifically protects Part 15 operations,” filing said.