Groups Ask FCC to Reject NAB 6 GHz Remand Concerns

NAB said in comments posted Thursday in docket 18-295 that the FCC had "no basis" to conclude its rules "can adequately protect licensed mobile operations." The commission should "reserve the 7070-7125 MHz portion of the 6 GHz band" because it's the "only proposal in the record that will protect licensed [electronic news-gathering] operations," NAB said. Use of a contention-based protocol has "demonstrably failed to protect broadcast ENG operations in the 2.4 GHz band," NAB said. There's "no technical basis for concluding that any CBP could plausibly protect itinerant ENG operations." Other commenters disagreed. NAB’s concerns are "vague and unsupported," said NCTA: It "provided no credible evidence of actual harmful interference from unlicensed 2.4 GHz devices to mobile indoor operations, nor has it shown that a contention-based protocol could not prevent the alleged harmful interference from occurring." NAB has "significantly misconstrued and misrepresented interference to ENG operations in the 2.4 GHz band," said Public Knowledge and New America's Open Technology Institute in joint comments: The "lack of evidence ... provides the commission with ample explanation for dismissing NAB's concerns." The court "broadly rejected challenges by NAB and others" to the order, and the FCC should "reject any argument for modification," said Apple, Broadcom, Cisco, Google, Hewlett Packard, Intel, Meta, Microsoft and Qualcomm in joint comments. The record didn't show that NAB’s "underlying assertion was, or is, accurate," said the Wi-Fi Alliance, saying there's "no connection" between ENG devices operating at the 2.4 GHz and 6 GHz bands. Don't create "any spectrum carveout based on the evidence offered to support such a carveout," said ACT | The App Association.