FCC Opens Lab for Public Test of White Spaces Devices

“All of these devices are not broken right now?” Association for Maximum Service TV President David Donovan asked pointedly. “As far as the proponents know, they all work?” After round one of testing during the summer, Microsoft officials said the device the company submitted had failed tests because it was broken. This time around, the FCC is promising to do all lab and field tests under the watchful eyes of representatives of broadcasters and high tech.

Office of Engineering and Technology Chief Julius Knapp warned the industry representatives that they must respect the work the engineers have to complete on a tight schedule: “We've got a lot of work to do back there. It’s not really the place for a debate.” Knapp added that companies and groups must abide by the FCC’s rules. “We always have our door open and are happy to listen to whatever you might want to offer, but again, this is being conducted in the context of an open rulemaking,” he said. “We have to make sure we follow our ex parte rules.”

Knapp opened the session noting the interest in the long, painstaking process that will play out at the lab in coming weeks. “Many of us made career choices early on whether to go into professional sports or engineering and we chose engineering because we knew it would draw big crowds,” he said. “We're doing our best to accommodate you.”

The tests started shortly after 11 a.m. and are to continue starting at 9 a.m. Friday. Philips, Microsoft and Silicon Valley start-up Adaptrum submitted devices and all were on display at the lab. Singapore’s Institute for Infocomm Research sent a device, but it got stuck at U.S. Customs. Knapp said the FCC would also look at any other equipment submitted. The devices are prototypes that bear little resemblance to those that would eventually be sold to the public if the FCC decides to allow them in the white spaces.

The first device tested Thursday was submitted by Philips -- being tested for its ability to detect DTV signals -- and the Microsoft device, being tested for its ability to detect signals from wireless microphones. The lab plans to test several devices at the same time as it goes on.

“The Wireless Innovation Alliance and our partners fully support the FCC’s initiation of additional prototype white space device testing, and welcome the opportunity for FCC engineers to gather the additional information necessary to unlock the potential of white space technology for all Americans,” the group said in a statement.

But MSTV sent the FCC a letter challenging whether the proposed testing of these prototype sensors is thorough enough to protect TV broadcasts from harmful interference. Among its objections is that the OET test plan fails to examine whether the much smaller antennas that would be part of commercial devices would work as well as the antennas attached to the prototype devices.

The OET also isn’t examining the effect of multiple DTV signals, such as third order intermodulation products or the effect on mobile TV, and in general fails to “properly test or quantify how personal/portable devices will actually be used,” MSTV complained. Donovan told us none of his concerns had been put to rest.

“It may well be that OET and the Commission have future tests in mind to evaluate a number of these issues, and that additional testing will be undertaken,” MSTV said: “Whether these issues are taken into account in this round or in a future round of testing, it is imperative that they are evaluated in order to prevent harmful interference to television services and other licensed operations in the band… The stakes in this proceeding are far higher than ever before. If unlicensed devices are allowed to operate in the band, without first ensuring that they will not create harmful interference, the result will be that America’s free, universal and local television service will be jeopardized.”

Google, meanwhile, made a filing this week questioning assertions by Sprint Nextel, T-Mobile, FiberTower and the Rural Telecommunications Group that licensed wireless backhaul is the best use for the spectrum (CD Jan 4 p1). Google said the proposal makes little sense.

“For starters, the notion of employing a licensing regime ignores the fact that granting exclusive licensing rights in the white spaces spectrum would actually bring licensees, as primary users, into direct conflict with each other, thus creating significant interference issues,” Google said. “Moreover, backhaul simply is not the most efficient, or even marginal, use of the white spaces spectrum. The favorable propagation characteristics of this spectrum for localized high-bandwidth service offerings do not translate well into backhauling voice and data traffic over considerable distances.”