OPPONENTS TELL FCC REVISED 800 MHZ PLAN ADDS NEW CONCERNS

“The Nextel plan remains fundamentally flawed and unduly benefits the entity that is causing the vast majority of the interference to public safety -- Nextel,” Alltel, AT&T Wireless, Cingular Wireless and Sprint PCS said in joint comments. While Nextel raised its relocation and retuning funding to $850 million from $500 million in latest plan, they said that would cover only 1% of public safety receivers that would need to be replaced, and that would leave “99% of the public safety receivers still subject to interference.” Carriers and others have stressed that spectrum Nextel would surrender at 700, 800 and 900 MHz in return for licenses elsewhere was unfair exchange. Fragmented spectrum relinquished by Nextel in return for contiguous blocks at 1.9 GHz and elsewhere amounted to “spectrum grab,” they said. Their filing assailed $850 million fund as being capped and not containing reserve. “If the money runs out for any reason, including the likely need to replace more than 1% of public safety receivers, public safety relocation will simply stop,” carriers said.

United Telecom Council (UTC) also urged FCC not to adopt revised proposal, charging deal was “secretly negotiated” without input from thousands of licensees who would be affected. Supplemental filing by Nextel, Industrial Telecom Assn., public safety groups and others filled in details on earlier spectrum swap plan. Plan would reconfigure 700, 800 and 900 MHz bands, in part by Nextel’s giving up spectrum in return for bands elsewhere, including some mobile satellite service spectrum. Proposal is “massively complex, inequitable and would not meet the needs of critical infrastructure,” UTC Gen. Counsel Jill Lyon said. In joint comments, UTC and Edison Electric Institute said updated proposal was “so replete with legal inadequacies, administrative complexity and poor policy direction that it must fall.” Filing opposed retuning coordination committee proposal as giving nearly unfettered authority over impacted licensees to small number of entities. “At the same time, the proposed multiyear freeze on all other 800 MHz licensing would prevent needed modifications, expansions or upgrades to mission-critical systems,” it said.

Nextel told FCC that “every legitimate question concerning the consensus plan” had been covered. In defending $850 million commitment, carrier said all incumbents that would relocate under plan would be entitled to reimbursement. Plan could be put in place in 3-1/2 years “with minimal disruption of incumbent licensee operations,” filing said. “All licensees affected by 800 MHz band interference will benefit from the consensus plan, even the cellular carriers that have thus far made every effort to obstruct and delay the plan’s adoption,” Nextel said. It disputed characterization of Nextel as virtually sole contributor to interference at 800 MHz, saying cellular providers were “significant” sources of problem. Cellular carriers would gain benefit of interference resolution and wouldn’t have to contribute to incumbent relocation costs, Nextel said. “Despite the prospect of this ‘free ride,’ the cellular carriers and the CTIA remain opposed to the consensus plan, a stance that can only be seen as anticompetitive,” it said.

Nextel’s proposed replacement spectrum would cover 1910- 1915/1990-1995 MHz. Wireless Communications Assn. (WCA) has proposed using bands to relocate Multipoint Distribution Service (MDS) channels at 2.1 GHz that would move to make way for advanced wireless services in 3G proceeding at FCC. WCA assailed Nextel’s plan to give up 700, 800 and 900 MHz spectrum for public safety, saying spectrum that carrier would surrender couldn’t be equated with clear spectrum it would receive at 1.9 GHz. Nextel’s demand “is more akin to ransom than a quid pro quo, the ‘hostage’ being Nextel’s willingness to fund its plan to reduce the interference it is causing to public safety operations,” WCA said. “Nextel’s proposed surrender of its 700/800/900 MHz spectrum bears no meaningful relationship to the interference Nextel is causing to public safety operations and is not necessary to solve that problem,” WCA said.

CTIA reiterated its opposition, and said revised proposal “adds some new concerns… This is an issue that demands swift resolution.” “The joint commenters’ plan is unnecessarily complex, extremely resource intensive and will take nearly 4 years to complete,” CTIA Pres. Tom Wheeler said: “This solution is neither swift nor sure.” Besides reiterating concerns over initial version of plan, CTIA said revised proposal “adds some new concerns.” It said plan would ask FCC to violate Sec. 309(j) of Communications Act by giving Nextel spectrum for terrestrial wireless service without auction. Assn. urged FCC to adopt its alternative proposal for relieving interference at 800 MHz. CTIA plan would improve public safety equipment and focus on commercial wireless-public safety interference mitigation efforts, it said. If needed, CTIA proposal would do interim rebanding within 800 MHz band relocate 800 MHz public safety users to 700 MHz.

Key shortfall, CTIA charged, is that plan “unnecessarily rewards Nextel with a spectrum windfall in the 1.9 GHz band, enabling Nextel to occupy this extremely valuable spectrum block even before the rebanding efforts are begun, let alone completed.” Assn. also criticized plan’s complexity, saying it involves 26 separate deadlines over 42 months covering 2,500 licensees. It raised concerns over proposed Relocation Coordination Committee to carry out activities such as frequency coordination. That would ask FCC and public safety users to “cede control” of relocation to nongovt. entity, CTIA said.

Motorola focused more on fine-tuning several parts of joint proposal, including impact of mechanics of realignment. Company said 800 MHz proposal would impose freeze on new applications for business, industrial and land transportation systems and high-site specialized mobile radio systems, on Chs. 121-400, to bar “speculators” from hampering 800 MHz rebanding. Motorola suggested freeze not be implemented because small amount of “white space” at 800 MHz left little room for speculation of that sort. Proposal would create relocation coordination committee to work with public safety operators to implement new systems on channels to which they were relocated rather than on existing channels whenever possible. Motorola said plan had interest in minimizing cases in which newly deployed facilities must be retuned, but it said: “The Commission must ensure that the timely deployment of public safety systems takes priority over the conservation of realignment funds.” Panel’s actions shouldn’t create “undue delays” in implementing public safety systems already in development, it said.

Motorola said joint plan contained safeguards and responsibilities for public safety, private wireless and commercial carriers if interference occurred after rebanding was completed. One proposal is that licensees’ operating base stations in 851-861 MHz would be entitled to operate free from measurable interference caused by commercial mobile radio service operations above 861 MHz under certain conditions. “Many existing public safety and private wireless users expect coverage at lower signal strengths than these thresholds represent,” Motorola said. As result, public safety and private wireless licensees might have to take additional steps, such as building additional transmit sites, to continue receiving interference protection in fringe coverage areas.

National Assn. of Manufacturers (NAM) and its frequency coordination arm MRFAC told FCC that joint plan reflected “substantial effort” to address 800 MHz interference but still raised unresolved issues. NAM and MRFAC said strengthened “best practices” principles represented positive change, but said revised plan would put in place “an entirely new, terribly complex regime for implementation of retuning/reimbursement,” which they said was unnecessary. Existing rules, with adjustments, could address same problems, filing said. They also said private wireless users would receive disparate treatment under proposal compared with public safety operators, with users relegated to guard band spectrum when relocated and they wouldn’t be allowed to review and approve their own applications. Like other commenters, NAM also questioned legality of delegating FCC functions to separate administrative entity in form of relocation coordination committee “without adequate safeguards against discriminatory practices… The process sharply restricts the range of issues subject to arbitration and, even as to those, would use a form of arbitration which is ill-suited to the task.”