FCC Ready to Handle White Spaces Interference Complaints, Martin Tells Dingell
The FCC will investigate all allegations of white spaces interference if it approves rules opening the TV white spaces to unlicensed mobile devices, Chairman Kevin Martin assured House Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell, D-Mich. Approval is expected Tuesday. Martin defended as proper the procedures the agency followed in its peer review of an Office of Engineering and Technology report on white spaces interference. Martin filed the responses Friday, answering an Oct. 24 letter from Dingell.
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!
“The Commission expects to investigate allegations of interference caused by ‘white spaces devices’ in the same way that it investigates other instances of interference,” Martin said. “The Commission would seek to identify the device causing the interference either through an inquiry to the party causing the interference, if known, or by an on-scene investigation through the use of mobile direction-finding equipment employed by our various Field offices.”
If a particular device is found to cause interference, the FCC will require its maker to do more testing, Martin said. “In particularly egregious instances, the Commission may initiate measures to revoke an equipment authorization,” he said. The agency also is prepared to move against individuals who buy devices and modify them to cause interference, he said.
Responding to Dingell’s query about peer review of the OET report, Martin said a review was completed Oct. 1 by engineers working for the Wireless and Enforcement bureaus. The FCC released the report two weeks later. It was unclear whether the agency had to conduct a peer review of the report under federal rules, but OET decided to undertake one anyway “out of an abundance of caution,” Martin said.
The FCC considered proposals to license the spectrum, but unlicensed use offers TV viewers and other incumbents more protection from interference, Martin said. “Unlicensed devices would not have interference protection rights, must avoid causing harmful interference to incumbent services, and can be designed to cope with a changing radio environment,” he said. “In short, unlicensed operations would be required to avoid any disruption of the existing services.”
In letters to the FCC and Congress, Google and FiberTower clashed over whether the FCC should allocate part of the white spaces spectrum for licensed use, to provide backhaul. The FCC is examining whether, as part of its white spaces item, to begin a further rulemaking on licensing the upper panel of TV channels while reserving the rest for unlicensed use. The main proposal before the commission is by FiberTower.
“Such proposals make little sense as an engineering matter,” Google said in an FCC ex parte. “Further, a proposal in the white spaces docket to set aside valuable spectrum for a licensed or ‘hybrid’ licensed backhaul service is inconsistent with, and poses interference concerns for, potential unlicensed business models utilizing the white spaces.”
Google is missing the importance of backhaul, FiberTower said. “The engineering fact is that no mobile broadband networks ever work without backhaul and this spectrum provides the ability to reach 70 miles per link using existing technology,” it said. “The FiberTower-RTG proposal seeks to use a statistically trivial amount of spectrum in rural areas -- spectrum that Google does not need. Other spectrum in the microwave bands, at 3.65 GHz and 2.5 GHz, fails to meet the distance and economic requirements, and in both cases, only exists in an extremely patchwork manner.”
The Wireless Internet Service Providers Association asked the FCC to adopt its “licensed-lite” approach for the TV white spaces, in an ex parte. This “would ensure that American consumers will be able to receive signals from televisions, WISPs, network interconnections and personal/portable devices without interference,” WISPA said. “No other proposal in this proceeding offers consumers such a result.” Granting such a nationwide non-exclusive license would promote investment in rural broadband, the group said. “WISPs today are generally unable to raise the capital necessary to expand networks further into rural and underserved areas because investors are unwilling to provide capital in spectrum bands that are cluttered with ‘noise’ and interference,” WISPA said. “The issuance of a license, in combination with base station registration and other components of the ‘licensed-lite’ plan, will promote capital investment and facilitate broadband in rural communities.” The proposal also includes an Internet-based registration process “that minimizes the potential for interference before service commences,” the group said.