Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0522.012 2002-2004 JM~Y os M, Y (;ARY SAFARIK COMMI"F'fEF:S ('nuncilmnmher Public Works & Intergovernmental Relations District P Puna 6lakai ~7 ~ ~ Chair Phone: 1808) 961-8267 jr.{~-~,;~~,• Housing Agency Fax: (808) 961-8912 ~*i Os_~M~'•1~ Chair gsafarik(tt7inteipac.net County gfHawni'i Finance Hcna~ui `i Counq~ Building Vice-Chair _'S Aupvni Street Hilo, Hawaii 96720 r r: .7 _ June 22, 2004 Or-, c= N MEMORANDUM TO: Chairman James Arakaki and J' Hawaii County Councilmembe(rjs~ FROM: Gary Safarik, Councilmember y!/Q" 1' RE: Police Trunked Radio System Conversion After the request for an amendment to the Capital budget requesting $720,000 for the above-mentioned subject matter was made, I gathered further information. So far we know that Honolulu, Maui and Kaua `i counties are not converting to the 700 MHz system at this time. There is a federal mandated 700 MHz Public Safety Planning Committee for Region 11 in place for the state's public safety agencies to develop a usage plan for the 700 MHz band. The attached correspondence and articles have more information. Please contact me if you have any questions or need additional information. Thank you. GS/lg Attachments A through K Comm. No. S Z~"' (L Rif. To: PLsf. Cate, 4 Ha~ti'oi'i Ca~nty~ is m~ lSqual Opporn~nity Provider and Enaplover ~wYr ,a~ N~ti,' Phone: 805 961-5267 GARY S9FARllC ~ ( ) (Tumcfln~eniber Pax: (808)961-5912 r- ,1,i safaril:(~~,interpac.net County Council Couniv oJNuirui'i Nuirai'i ('ou¢m Bulldi~ig 3 i : l upuei S'o'ar! llilu //u mai 'i )6-~0 April 28, 2004 Harry Kobojiri, Deputy Chief of Police County of Hawaii Police Department 349 hapiolani Street Hilo, Hawaii 96720-3998 RE: Police 700 Megahertz Conversion The County Council is presently considering the Capital Budget for FY 2004-05, and the Capital Program for the next six years from Fiscal Year 2004-OS to 3009-10. At the April I9, 2004 meeting of the Council, I asked more information on the request for $720,000 by your Department for the 700 Megahertz Conversion. I understand that the total cost for the 700 Megahertz Conversion along, with the 700 Megahertz Communication System and the Microwave Relocation and System Renovation, is estimated at over $59,000,000. These kinds of expenditures deserve carefiil analysis, particularly in this case where this change to a 700 Megahertz system appears to have been made without adequate information provided to the Council. Please provide me with a written summary as to why the Police Department is moving from an 800 Megahertz conversion to a 700 Megahertz conversion. Also, please be prepared to answer any questions the Council may have at its meeting on May ] 9, 2004. Your assistance is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Gary f •ik, ice Chair Comm~ittee on Finance Dia~trirt I" Punu tilcil<ai lluia~i'i Cn~ii~lp is crn Eyi~ul (7~gn~i~nuiin~ Prandcr wid 6mplol yr ATT. A \~I<I~ J+YY os yt i Harry Kim ' Lh'? Lawrence l:. Alahuna Slaror Police Chief c:- it ~ ~r~ oi:H~y ~arr~. KUKtij lrl - Depury~'o(ice-E~hief County of Hawaii - POLICE DEPARTMENT - 349 Kapiolani Strcet Hilo, Hawaii 96720-3998 _ ~ (808) 935-7311 Fax (808) 961-2389 - - - ;v April 30, 2004 - , , TO A O, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE FROM E K. MAHUNA, POLICE CHIEF SUBJECT: RADIO SYSTEM The Managing Director asked that I provide you with an explanation for our Department's intention to develop a trunked land mobile radio system in the 700 MHz band as opposed to the 800 MHz band. Primarily, we were driven by a federal initiative to provide bandwidth in the 700 MHz spectrum specifically for public safety. The State of Hawaii has committed to the 700 MHz public safety radio band, and the County is a member of the 700 MHz Regional Planning Committee which is responsible for developing a spectrum allocation plan. The 700 MHz Band Plan encourages interoperability and is the first and only State and local Public Safety band that can be shared with federal government users. Currently, there are more available channels in the 700 MHz band to support interoperability. The 700 MHz Band Plan provides for both high speed and wideband data. Another concern is that an 800 MHz system will require more tower sites for the same area of coverage than would a 700 MHz system. Finally, there have been serious interference issues with public safety broadcasts in the 800 MHz band, primarily with some of the cellular phone providers. With the proliferation of cellular phone sites supporting the various Personal Communications Services (PCS), the net result is that some of the PCS companies overpower the 800 MHz trunked radio system, leaving communication gaps in the public safety system. With the use of the 700 MHz spectrum, this interference will be minimal or hopefully non-existent. ":1n Equal Opportunity Provider" DRT R MR. ROY TAKEMOTO APRIL 30, 2004 PAGE 2 One other concern for law enforcement is the relatively weak penetration of the signal in the 800 MHz bandwidth in commercial establishments and other large structures. If there are any questions, please feel free to contact Acting Assistant Chief Elroy Osorio at 961-2262. LKM/ETLO:Ivm c: Harry Kim, Mayor Aaron S. Y. Chung, Chair, Committee on Finance Gary Safarik, Vice Chair James Y. Arakaki, Member Leningrad Elarionoff, Member Fred C. Holschuh, Member Bob Jacobson, Member Joe Reynolds, Member Michael C. Tulang, Member J. Curtis Tyler, III, Member ~NtY•nr Nth. GAKYSAPARIK ~1~I~~~ti'. COMIVtI"("FEES CounciLneinher Public Works & Intergovernmental Rela[ions Distric[ I: Pui~u hlokoi Chair Phone: (808) 961-8367 j•;=-;•~ I lousing Agency J N. M~ Fax: (808) 961-8912 art oi•N~~~ Gra6~ esaiarik~inter~a~ c.nct CounlyoJ7Taticoa`i Finuncc Hawaii Cou~~lp (3uildiizg Pico-Chair 75 Aupunf S'Iree1 Hilo, Hawai "i 96720 May 19, 2004 James Y. Arakaki, Chair Hawaii County Council 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii 96720 RE: Capital Budget Amendment Bill 238, Draft 2 Submitted for your consideration is an amendment for the following item related to the Police 700 Megahertz Conversion: 2004038 Police [700 Megahertz] Trunked Radio System Conversion $720,000 Sincerely, A Gary a ri ,J Hawni'i County is an h</ual Opporninili~ Prorrdcr and 6mplover ATT. C y~=/ ~ CITY COUNCIL " CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU ,:P~,::a_. zti ~~i HONOLULU, HAWAII 96813-3065 /TELEPHONE 547-7000 '~~S7q't n~P _ ~I H ROMY M. CACHOLA COUNCILMEMBER (808)547-7007 (808) 523-4220 (fax) e-mail rcachola aco.honolulu.hi.us May 24, 2004 The Honorable Gary D. Safarik, Member County Council, District 5 County of Hawaii 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Dear Coun ' m~ 'k: Please find attached an e-mail response to your question asked at the HSAC Executive Committee meeting of May 20, 2004 regarding the public safety telecommunication spectrum. According to Assistant Chief Karl Godsey of the Honolulu Police Department, who sent the e- mail, the Department is not currently studying the conversion of the City's public safety telecommunication spectrum from 800 megahertz (Mhz) to 700 Mhz. Assistant Chief Godsey, however, also indicates that public safety agencies of the State are members of afederally-mandated committee that is reviewing the issue. I hope this communication is helpful to you. If you have any more questions, please feel free to contact me. Very truly yours, O Y M. CHOLA Ho olulu i Council, 7`h District Enclosure cc: The Honorable Dain P. Kane, President Hawaii State Association of Counties ATT. D Page 1 of 2 Yuen, Cissy From: Godsey, Karl Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 11:18 AM To: Cachola, Romy Cc: Lee, Benjamin B.; Donohue, Lee D.; Tom, Malcolm J.; Kajiyama, Glen; Putrulu, Paul; Quinn, Cheryl Subject: 800 MHz to 700 MHz Aloha Councilmember Cachola: In response to your question "is HPD or any other City agencies planning to move from the 800 MHz spectrum to the 700 MHz spectrum" the short answer is no. However, Fire, Police, and the Department of Information Technology are members of the 700 MHZ PUBLIC SAFETY PLANNING COMMITTEE FOR REGION 11. This is a federally mandated committee that requires participation irI planning for the use of 700 MHz bandwidth that has been given to the Public Safety agencies in the State. As you are aware from our presentations about 800 MHz to the Council, 800 MHz bandwidth is interleavened with private cell companies. In order to address this concern, one thought is to provide contiguous bandwidth to Public Safety in order to overcome some of the interference issues that occur in 800 MHz. Using this bandwidth requires the formation of a governing committee before bandwidth can be designated. If there is to be a move to 700 MHz it will occur at least several years from now. The Federal Consensus plan on which this is predicated would require cell phone companies such as NEXTEL to pay for the movement of the 800 MHz users to 700 MHz. This is up in the air right now. Below I have included the Name and Purpose portion of the by-laws of the committee. I hope this answers your question. 700 MHZ PUBLIC SAFETY PLANNING COMMITTEE FOR REGION 11 ARTICLE I NAMF, ~ PLiRPOSE 1.1 Name and purpose. The name of this regional committee shall be "The 700 MHz Public Safety Planning Committee for Region 11" hereinafter referred to as the Regional Committee. Its primary purpose is to cooperatively develop, implement, maintain, and administer the frequency usage plan for the 700 MHz Public Safety Band within the state of Hawaii. The 700 MHz Public Safety Band is composed of the frequencies between 764 MHz and 776 MHz and the corresponding frequencies between 794 MHz and 806 MHz. The Regional Committee shall: Encourage the efficient and intensive use of the 700 MHz Public Safety Band, Enable the development of a regional interoperability plan, Accommodate new and as yet unanticipated developments in technology, systems, and equipment; and Promote the development of local and regional public safety communications systems designed to achieve interoperability and multiple agency public safety communications systems that ellectively accommodate all public safety services providers. 05/25/2004 Page 2 of 2 Karl Godsey Assistant Chief Support Services Bureau Honolulu Police Department (808)529-3255 05/25/2004 800 MHz decision is expected soon Page 1 of 2 ~r~ ~ n m ~ ~ • o... ar r, =G a-:=~+~s . st .>:,x=^ v . ua F r, r=, r+u c ~INi~ ~ MM4,4YMYdY ttt9f£Plbk)fEbH1`ADGI 800 MHz decision is expected soon BY DONNY JACKSON Mobile Radio Technology, )an 1, 2004 Public-safety organizations, critical-infrastructure entities and wireless carriers using 800 MHz spectrum soon may be preparing to shift to different frequencies, as the Federal Communications Commission is expected to address the well-chronicled interference problems in the band this month or next. Two primary proposals have been submitted to the FCC to resolve the interference issues, most of which involve conflicts with expanding wireless carrier Nextel Communications. One calls for rebanding the spectrum, while the other proposes technical solutions to mitigate the problem. Known as the Consensus Plan, the rebanding strategy is supported by most public-safety organizations and Nextel, which submitted a white paper two years ago that outlined the plan. It calls for Nextel to move from its interleaved 800 MHz spectrum to a continuous block within the band, and to exchange 700 MHz and 900 MHz frequencies for a block of 1.9 GHz spectrum. Nextel also has pledged to pay $850 million to absorb the costs of relocating and re-tuning other 800 MHz users to a contiguous block elsewhere in the band. Opponents of this plan argue that the three-and-a-half years needed to implement such a spectrum shuffle means the interference problems would not be addressed quickly enough. They're also concerned Nextel would receive a spectrum windfall if the rebanding plan were to be adopted as proposed. Instead, wireless carriers competing with Nextel and other 800 MHz users that would be forced to move under the rebanding plan are supporting a plan that calls for the creation of engineering best practices that would be used within the 800 MHz band to mitigate interference. Motorola, Nextel's primary vendor and one of the largest manufacturers of equipment for other 800 MHz users, submitted comments to the FCC in May 2003 indicating it had developed receivers that could address interference problems without rebanding. Such technical solutions could be implemented immediately without inconveniencing public-safety groups or critical-infrastructure entities such as power companies, according to Jill Lyon, vice president and general counsel for the United Telecom Council, an association of utility companies. She called rebanding a "pie in the sky" proposal that is fraught with logistical problems, not the least of which involves assurances that funding will be available to pay for the proposed changes. There are indications that the costs of rebanding could exceed Nextel's $850 million estimate by a significant margin, she said. Perhaps the most disconcerting aspect of the rebanding proposal is a stipulation that would limit technological development for 800 MHz users other than Nextel, Lyon said. Users of the spectrum block below the 861 MHz demarcation point would have to use high-tower, high-power technologies, while Nextel would be able to use shorter towers and lower-power systems that are characteristic of ATT. E http://iwce-mrt.corn/microsites/magazinearticle.asp?mode=print&magazinearticleid=190317... 6/23/04 800 MHz decision is expected soon Page 2 of 2 advanced communications, she said. "What that does is make Nextel the only player in the band with new technology," Lyon said. But Nextel believes the technical solutions proposed by opponents represent no more than a temporary patch, not a complete resolution. The carrier recently used myriad engineering techniques in an attempt to address its interference problems with the City of Denver, but the parties ultimately decided that a channel swap was necessary. "[The technical-solution proposal] really just delays the inevitable and is inherently reactive,"said Chris Doherty, Nextel's senior director of public affairs. "We think those are good strategies to use after rebanding." It's doubtful the FCC will adopt the portion of the rebanding plan that most concerns Lyons, because the commission wants to permit flexible uses for spectrum, said Rudy Baca, analyst for The Precursor Group. Although there is a good chance Nextel will not get the 1.9 GHz spectrtun it desires, the FCC likely will opt to clean the 800 MHz band by rebanding rather than using technical solutions to mitigate the problems, he said. "We're out of time for patches." 800 MHZ SAGA: BAND ON THE RUN . November 2001: Nextel proposes plan to vacate its interleaved spectrtun in the 800 MHz band and exchange other spectrum in return for unencumbered spectrum at 800 MHz and 1.9 GHz. . March 2002: The FCC releases a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to solicit comments from all parties. • August 2002: The major points of the Nextel proposal are presented to the FCC as the "Consensus Plan," with the blessing of most public-safety organizations. • Early May 2003: Motorola says interference problems at 800 MHz can be resolved if users will deploy better receivers in their systems. • Late May 2003: Dubbed the "Balanced Approach" plan, an alternative to the Consensus Plan is proposed to the FCC that calls for technical solutions instead of rebanding to resolve interference. • January/February 2004: Sources predict the FCC will release its preliminary order to address interference issues in the 800 MHz band. © 2004, Primedia Business Magazines and Media, a PRIMEDIA company. All rights reserved. This article is protected by United States copyright and other intellectual property laws and may not be reproduced, rewritten, distributed, redisseminated, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast, directly or indirectly, in any medium without the prior written permission of PRIMEDIA Business Corp. m 2004 Primedia Business Magazines and Media. All Rights Reserved. For Search PaRners I Contact Us For Ad http://iwce-mrt. com/micro sites/magazinearticle.asp?mode=print&magazinearticleid=190317... 6/23 /04 800 MHz debate rages on and on Page 1 of 3 NiNAir2.~_' ii., _ d,P P;.iA -3b<- 4f"CilAiI1 ~ PKl!L_13a31 CI Ct M11YIIlilbfgbe MfgLEAYDiLt T89MA.t+GY 800 MHz debate rages on and on Mobile Radio Technology, Jan 1, 2004 Consensus Plan adds more problems than it solves By Jill Lyon and Diane Cornell The Federal Communications Commission has before it an important proceeding that is vital to our country's public-safety and critical-infrastructure community. This proceeding was initiated with three admirable goals: first, remedying interference to 800 MHz public-safety systems; second, ensuring minimum disruption to the existing licensing structure; and third, assuring sufficient spectrum for critical public-safety communications. Unfortunately, the proceeding has moved far from these basic goals. Instead, it has focused on a so- called "Consensus Plan" (initiated by Nextel), which does not remedy interference to public-safety systems and contains numerous other infirmities. The plan represents a complicated restructuring -involving the moving of radio assignments which would cause significant disruption to all public-safety licensees throughout the country, regardless of whether they aze receiving any interference. Despite clever rhetoric, the reality is that interference will only be slightly improved. Currently, the public-safety community is experiencing three types of interference: out of band, intermodulation and receiver overload. While interference from out-of--band emissions would decrease under the Consensus Plan, other types of interference -such as intermodulation - would be improved only mazginally. Intermodulation and receiver-overload interference can only be eliminated ifpublic-safety obtains new receivers. Yet, the Consensus Plan contemplates the replacement of just 1 percent of such receivers. Motorola, which manufactures the vast majority ofpublic-safety radios, recently published a study using the Consensus Plan's own assumptions, and concluded that up to 30 percent ofpublic-safety radios may have to be replaced. Such an increase would raise costs by more than $2 billion. Unfortunately, only $700 million has been earmarked for public safety under this plan. Should cost overruns occur, public-safety and state treasuries that already are drowning in red ink might be forced to make up the difference. Consensus Plan proponents tout the illusion that public safety will get additional spectrum at 800 MHz. This is highly speculative. It requires Nextel to vacate its spectrum in the middle of the 800 MHz band. It also assumes that other, non-public-safety licensees will not need it to meet their own mandated rebanding obligations. Nextel would require 16 MHz of 800 MHz spectrum in a market before public- safety would receive any additional space. Moreover, if any 800 MHz spectrum becomes available to public safety, it will not be for some years into a complex rebanding process. ATT. F http://iwce-mrt.com/microsites/magazinearticle.asp?mode=print&magazinearticleid=190329... 6/23/04 800 MHz debate rages on and on Page 2 of 3 We need a faster, more focused approach to the 800 MHz radio interference problem. The "Balanced Approach" plan attacks and resolves interference -both proactively and reactively - at its source with enhanced best practices and without the significant disruptions contemplated in the Consensus Plan.lt provides a solution wherever a problem exists, and pays to fix that problem at no cost to public safety. And, unlike the Consensus Plan, there is no funding cap. If a problem exists, the Balanced Approach plan pays to have it fixed, and quickly. There is no cap on the number of receivers that would have to be replaced. There is no benefit to one commercial operator. There is no disruption to public safety throughout the country. Instead, there is a deliberate and thoughtful focus on the safety and lives of our first responders. The Federal Communications Commission needs to heaz from the public-safety community about its real needs. Editor's Note: Jill Lyon is general counsel for the United Telecom Council and Diane Cornell is vice president for regulatory affairs at the Cellulaz Telecommunications & Internet Association. Visit www.Fix800MHzNow.com to obtain additional information regazding the Balanced Approach plan. Balanced Approach plan proponents distort the facts By Alan Tiller Unfortunately, the CTIA/UTC commentary on the preceeding page significantly distorts what is -and is not -part of the "Consensus Plan." It also claims benefits from the Balanced Approach that the overwhelming majority of the public-safety community does not believe will occur. Allow me to focus my rebuttal on a few key statements made by the proponents: "Should cost overruns occur, public-safety and state treasuries that already are drowning In red ink might be forced to make up the d~erence. " -The Consensus Plan always has provided that no entity need move without the complete necessary funding already having been committed, and in escrow, for that relocation. Period. No public safety entity will be required to put out any money, up front or otherwise. To suggest otherwise is a gross misrepresentation of the Consensus Plan. "Consensus Plan proponents tout the illusion that public safety will get additional spectrum at 800 MHz. This is highly speculative. " - In fact, Consensus Plan advocates conducted sample studies before the plan was submitted. The number of additional frequencies that will be available to public safety after rebanding was discussed at several Association ofPublic-Safety Communications Officials (APCO), International seminazs. In some very large urban azeas (Dallas, for example), the number was quite significant. In other areas (such as San Diego), the number was small. The Balanced Approach proponents have never submitted or otherwise shown any evidence or studies to support their statement. "The Balanced Approach plan attacks and resolves interference, both proactively and reactively, at its source with enhanced best practices. " -Please take the time to review what the proponents have actually filed. You will find that their series of solutions is only imposed on carriers operating from 851 MHz to 869 MHz. In other words, cellular operators are exempt from the requirements the proponents seek to impose. However, this ignores the fact that Cellulaz A systems aze a significant cause of interference, particularly to National Public Safety Planning Advisory Committee (NPSPAC) systems. In any case, best practices -enhanced or otherwise -aze no panacea or interference "silver bullet." Cities such as Denver have been using so-called enhanced best practices for quite some time now, with negligible http://iwce-mrt.com/microsites/magazinearticle.asp?mode=print&magazinearticleid=190329... 6/23/04 800 MHz debate rages on and on Page 3 of 3 success. (Please refer to Denver's engineering consultant's presentation on the APCO web site for further information.) If what the cellular operators are proposing is so wonderful, why have the Cellular A operators in Denver, Anne Arundel County, Md., Orange County, Calif, and other locations been unable to resolve their interference issues after more than three years of effort? The fact is, "best practices" are at best a temporary bandage because they fail to correct the underlying causes ofpublic-safety interference in the 800 MHz band. The suggestion that the CTIA/UTC approach is a "proactive" solution is simply not credible. Areas of interference cannot be predicted with any kind of certainty -where are the engineers who will tell you that the Balanced Approach can do that? Adopting this approach will place officers' lives at risk, as they will experience unresolved or new areas of interference when they need communications most. Remember, as cellular companies continue to build out their sites, and use lower and lower sites, this problem will only grow. Moreover, as Cellular A carriers replace their analog service with broadband technology, interference to public-safety operators using the NPSPAC channels will worsen; yet, broadband architectures preclude using the best-practices tool of taking out a channel or two to prevent an intetmodulation "hit." In other words, interference that can be mitigated today - at least temporarily -will be irreparable in the not-too-distant future. While I might accept the notion that the Consensus Plan isn't the most wonderful thing since sliced bread, I can tell you it isn't one-sided, as it was the result of negotiations to reach a fair compromise for all parties. I also can tell you that the Balanced Approach plan only benefits Nextel's competitors as well as private radio attorneys who will get to spend the rest of their billable days at the FCC arguing over whether there is interference at a particular location, and which carrier or carriers caused it. At the end of the day, that doesn't serve the public interest. Editor's Note: Alan Tilles is counsel to numerous entities in the private radio, Internet and entertainment industries. He is a partner in the law firm of Shulman Rogers Gandal Pordy & Ecker, and can be reached at atilles(a)srgpe.c~m. © 2004, Primedia Business Magazines and Media, a PRIM EDIA company. All rights reserved. This article is protected by United States copyright and other intellectual property laws and may not be reproduced, rewritten, distributed, redisseminated, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast, directly or indirectly, in any medium without the prior written permission of PRIMEDIA Business Corp. ®2004 Primedia Business Magazines antl Media. All Rights Reserved. For Search Partners Contact Us For Atl http://iwce-mrt.com/microsites/magazinearticle.asp?mode=print&magazinearticleid=190329... 6/23/04 CONGRESS SEEKS QUICK 800 MHZ REBAND Page 1 of 1 ~NI8 h510.1 <'~~iL ~ tiFP1 ~~=R•'=f_i pS ~ fECUtITY ~ ~fiRl il': r"1Ct CONGRESS SEEKS QUICK 800 MHZ REBAND Donny Jackson Mobile Radio Technology, Mar 1, 2004 Amid speculation that the Federal Communications Commission will reband 800 MHz frequencies this month, some federal lawmakers threw their support behind the plan but expressed significant opposition to Nextel Communications getting 10 MHz of spectrum at 1.9 GHz as part of the deal. In a Feb. 271etter to FCC Chairman Michael Powell, 23 U.S. representatives said the commission should reband 800 MHz "as quickly as possible" to remove most of the interference problems Nextel has caused for public-safety organizations. But a Consensus Plan proposal calling for Nextel to receive 1.9 GHz should be discarded, according to the Congressional contingent. Not only does the Communication Act prohibit such a spectrum grant, but there are enough interested bidders that auctioning the airwaves would raise "billions of dollazs for the U.S. Treasury," the letter stated. Sepazately, Verizon Wireless reiterated its belief that Nextel would receive a $7.2 billion windfall if the Consensus Plan were adopted. Verizon also said the FCC should refuse to adopt the proposal as the Department of Justice investigates Nextel for possible antitrust violations in the push-to-talk market. Nextel countered with a press release stating it would lose $4.6 billion under the Consensus Plan and expressing "confidence that we have conducted ourselves appropriately" with respect to the DOJ inquiry. Rudy Baca, wireless strategist at The Precursor Group, said he believes the FCC will decide in March to reband 800 MHz but avoid the "political firestorm" that would come with granting Nextel spectrum at 1.9 GHz. Nextel also would be expected to fulfill its commitment to ante $850 million to help pay for rebanding. "It's not going to be enough to pay for it completely," Baca said. "They'll probably turn to the states for [funding] help." © 2004, Primedia Business Magazines and Media, a PRIMEDIA company. All rights reserved. This article is protected by United States copyright and other intellectual property laws and may not be reproduced, rewritten, distributed, redisseminated, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast, directly or indirectly, in any medium without the prior written permission of PRIMEDIA Business Corp. ©2004 Primedia Business Magazines antl Metlia. All Rights Reserved. For Search Partners (Contact Us For Ad ATT. G http://iwce-mrt.com/microsites/magazinearticle.asp?mode=print&magazinearticleid=195106... 6/23/04 FCC closes in on 800 MHz decision Page 1 of 2 M3F~A4 (kkn:. .lit-.iPP..-CF ~GM~GFCURI3Y~IpitFif ~:f Ytt R,eM6,YWt~Mtt NC6iY PAOIU TKllYY.UG FCC closes in on 800 MHz decision By Glenn Bischoff Mobile Radio Technology, Apr 1, 2004 Federal Communications Commission staff last month recommended adoption of the Consensus Plan to mitigate the interference that plagues the 800 MHz band and disrupts first-responder communications in many sections of the country, according to sources. But there is a significant twist. The FCC staff also recommended the rejection of Nextel's offer to pay $850 million to cover the costs of the rebanding and instead called for the commission to negotiate the carrier's final financial contribution, with no cap, sources said. Critics maintain that the final cost of the rebanding will far exceed Nextel's projections. "The Consensus Plan suggests that only 1 % of handsets will have to be replaced as a result of the rebanding," said Jill Lyon, general counsel for the United Telecom Council. "But Motorola estimates that 30% of handsets will have to be replaced and that it will cost $77 million for each 1 % of handsets that are replaced. That would put the cost at $2.1 billion, just for the handsets." While generally supporting 800 MHz spectrum rebanding, Rep. Vito Fossella (R-N.Y.) last month also expressed concern about a potential budget shortfall should the Consensus Plan be adopted. "The Consensus Plan fails to provide sufficient funding to upgrade public-safety communications, with some estimating a shortfall of $1 billion," Fossella said in a statement. "Indeed, because no provisions have been made for additional funding to cover public safety's costs, the taxpayers will likely be forced to foot the bill." In addition to negotiating a larger contribution from Nextel, the FCC staff called for the carrier to pay for the 10 MHz of spectrum it would receive in the 1.9 GHz band as part of the deal. At least one carrier - Verizon Wireless -has said it would be eager to participate in an auction for that spectrum, which would drive up the value of the airwaves. As a result, Nextel stands to pay a lot more than it had hoped to clean up the 800 MHz mess should the FCC commissioners adopt the staff recommendation. Patrick Comack, telecom analyst for Guzman & Co., predicted Nextel would pay an additional $1.5 billion on top of the $850 million it already has pledged, bringing its total payment to about $2.4 billion. But awarding Nextel the 1.9 GHz spectrum rather than auctioning the airwaves -even if the carrier pays a fair market price -could create a new headache for the FCC, according to Scott Cleland,CEO of The Precursor Group. "[The FCC has] got to thread the needle here, because that decision will be challenged in court," Cleland said. "They don't want rebanding to be caught up [in litigation]." Meanwhile, proponents of the Balanced Approach Plan continued their fight. First, they reiterated their ATT. H http://iwce-mrt.com/microsites/magazinearticle.asp?mode=print&magazinearticleid=196627... 6/24/04 FCC closes in on 800 MHz decision Page 2 of 2 claim that most interference problems could be resolved within a 60-day window through "best practices." One criticism of the Consensus Plan is that it will take 2-3 years to execute, though rebanding of the largest population centers is expected within the first year. The coalition further suggested that not all public-safety entities are behind the Consensus Plan, either because they have yet to experience the interference problems that afflict other portions of the country or because they are concerned rebanding would have a negative impact on their clnrent communications systems. "They aze up in arms over this," Lyon said. She suggested that was the reason the Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials International [APCO]endorsed the Consensus Plan without putting the matter to a membership vote. Vincent Stile, APCO chairman and police radio communications systems director for the Suffolk County (N.Y.) police department, acknowledged no vote occurred but said it was completely unnecessary, given the exhaustive work of APCO's Spectrum Management Committee. According to Stile, the committee consists of radio frequency engineers from across the country who studied 800 MHz interference for "well over a year and a half 'before making the recommendation to support the Consensus Plan. "This decision wasn't made by the Washington staff, and it wasn't aone-person decision. I take affront to that," Stile said. "The committee worked hard on this and came up with a good solution. `Best practices' is a stop-gap measure, a tool box to fix things after they happen." Charles Werner, deputy chief of the Charlottesville, Va., fire department and a member of the International Association of Fire Chiefs, which also supports the Consensus Plan, agreed with Stile's assessment. "We've heard a lot about `silver bullets,' but we don't think they exist," Werner said. "The only way [to solve interference] is to put more of the licensees closer to 700 MHz. Anything else is a shot in the dazk." With reporting by MRT senior writer Donny Jackson in Milwaukee. © 2004, Primedia Business Magazines and Media, a PRIMEDIA company. All rights reserved. This article is protected by United States copyright and other intellectual property laws and may not be reproduced, rewritten, distributed, redissemina[ed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast, directly or indirectly, in any medium without the prior written permission of PRIMEDIA Business Corp. ® 2004 Primedia Business Magazines and Media. All Rights Reserved. For Search Partners Contact Us I For Atl http://iwce-mrt.com/microsites/magazinearticle.asp?mode=print&magazinearticleid=196627... 6/24/04 800 MHz resolution delayed -again Page I of 5 .r;rH ae7 n., ,-,-.u,: - nrr. ;c s-,~;~s - rt o.,-~-v . n:+t ~,ierntte ~ mr~...r:~~ .KStt S00 MHz resolution delayed -again By Donny Jackson Mobile Radio Technology, May 1, 2004 Afier nearly two years waiting for the Federal Communications Commission to address interference problems at 800 MHz, anxious public-safety officials have been outspoken in their disappointment that the FCC did not issue an order last month as expected. "It's frustrating because we need to get a solution," said Bob Gurss, director of government affairs for the Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials International (APCO). "Every day we delay is another day people are at risk." But the matter has become increasingly complex, with Verizon Wireless vowing to bid at least $5 billion for the 1.9 GHz replacement spectrum earmarked for Nextel Communications and reports that the FCC might substitute 2.1 GHz airwaves for the 1.9 GHz frequencies contained in the proposal. Political pressures aze significant -Congress wants the revenue a spectrum auction would bring, while the security-conscious Bush administration wants the matter addressed before it becomes a potential election issue. "The administration is driving this. They want this done, and they want it done now," said Precursor wireless strategist Rudy Baca, who believes an FCC order is imminent and that the commission likely will take more of a "hazd-line" position with Nextel than it has in the past. Patrick Comack, telecom analyst for Guzman & Co., disagreed with the amount of leverage the FCC has, noting his belief that "Nextel can walk" if it doesn't like the terms. However, Comack echoed Baca's opinion that the administration is playing a big role, which he believes will benefit Nextel. "I guarantee you, President Bush did not spend time in [Nextel CEO Tim] Donahue's box at Daytona to talk about race cars," Comack said. But another source close to the negotiations indicated a deal might not happen until the FCC's meeting on May 13 "at the earliest," because there's no easily identifiable way to resolve all parties' interests. In an effort to resolve interference problems for public safety, the FCC is considering a staff report based on the framework of the so-called Consensus Plan, initially proposed by Nextel and which is supported by most major public-safety organizations. Under the Consensus Plan, interleaved spectrum at 800 MHz would be rebanded to provide contiguous spectrum for public safety and contiguous spectnam for Nextel. Nextel agreed to pay $850 million for the retuning of radios associated with rebinding and also would give public safety 4 MHz of additional spectrum that law-enforcement officials claim is sorely needed. In return, Nextel is seeking 10 MHz of nationwide spectrum at 1.9 GHz, which it would use to provide ATT. I http://iwce-mrt.com/microsites/magazinearticle.asp?mode=print&magazinearticleid=198444... 6/24/04 800 MHz resolution delayed -again Page 2 of 5 advanced data services. The Consensus Plan does not call for Nextel to make any additional payments, but most analysts believe the FCC will ask the wireless operator to pay an additional $2 billion for the spectrum - a price that still would be far less than the spectrum is worth, according to Verizon Wireless. With so many aspects of the issue in dispute, only a couple of items seem clear. First, the notion of trying to solve the interference issue via technical solutions - a proposal backed initially by Nextel's wireless competitors and utility companies -appears to be dead. Even Verizon Wireless spokesman Jeffrey Nelson said rebanding is "the right thing to do" within 800 MHz. But Verizon continues to oppose the part of the plan that would award Nextel additional airwaves outside 800 MHz, claiming that such spectrum should be auctioned. This belief likely means any FCC order based on the Consensus Plan will be challenged in court, which could delay the associated rebanding at least another year. "The FCC's scrambling, and they're realizing this is going to court -the briefs have already been written," Baca said. "They're just waiting for the FCC to make a decision." Opposition to the FCC awarding valuable 1.9 GHz spectrum to Nextel has been well chronicled, with Verizon describing such a proposal as a spectrum "windfall" to Nextel in filings with the FCC. If the 1.9 GHz airwaves were available for an "immediate" auction and licensed based on PCS rules - something Nextel expects, according to spokesman Tim O'Regan -Verizon said it would submit an opening bid of $5 billion. A Nextel ex parte letter to FCC said the Verizon vow "lacks credibility," noting that the many conditions cited "provide Verizon several ready excuses to retract its bid offer." More important, Nextel described the proposal as "irrelevant," because auction proceeds must be given to the U.S. Treasury and cannot be earmarked to pay for rebanding, as Nextel has committed to do. And funding is a big issue to public safety, especially with many communities struggling to stretch their budgets to meet unfunded Homeland Security mandates from the federal government, said Harlin McEwen, chairman of the communications and technology committee of the International Association of Chiefs of Police. "If [Verizon Wireless] got this to go to auction and they paid $5 billion for that spectrum, we have no solution to the problem," McEwen said. "As I told [Verizon], `Unless you can come up with a solution that pays for our problem and fixes it, then you aren't doing anything for us -you're just helping yourselves."' In its most recent ex parte letter to the FCC, Nextel characterized Verizon's vazious actions as "anti- competitive." At least one independent source said there is truth to that speculation. "Verizon has basically told me they are acting as a spoiler," said one source, who requested anonymity. "They want to stretch out Nextel's balance sheet." Verizon contends Nextel has taken advantage of the opportunities presented in a post-Sept. 11 environment to push a plan that benefits its bottom line in return for addressing an interference problem Nextel should have addressed more effectively in previous yeazs. "[Nextel] is amultibillion-dollar corporation," Nelson said. "This is King Midas standing in the welfare http://iwce-mrt.com/microsites/magazinearticle.asp?mode=print&magazinearticleid=198444... 6/24/04 800 MHz resolution delayed -again Page 3 of 5 line, looking for a handout." Given Verizon's opposition to awarding 1.9 GHz spectrum to Nextel, one alternative that has been discussed at the FCC is using 2.1 GHz spectrum -the airwaves Nextel targeted in its original 2001 white paper calling for a spectrum swap to address the 800 MHz interference issue. Another notion has been to award Nextel the controversial spectrum that NextWave Telecom is scheduled to return to the FCC later this year after reaching a settlement with the agency last month. O'Regan declined to comment on the NextWave idea, and the fact that the FCC does not yet have those airwaves may make that proposal moot. However, Nextel was adamant in its letter to the FCC that the 2.1 GHz frequencies no longer work well because changes in the FCC's spectrum plan means the airwaves are not adjacent to current advanced commercial wireless bands. As a resu?t, the costs of deploying a network using this spectrum would be much greater than at 1.9 GHz. Such a significant change in the proposal at this point also might require the FCC to restart the comment period, Nextel claimed. In addition, Nextel said substituting 2.1 GHz for 1.9 GHz in the plan would not reduce the odds of the issue being challenged in court. Indeed, while stopping short of saying Verizon would file a lawsuit to block a 2.1 GHz spectrum award to Nextel, Nelson said Verizon's legal philosophy regarding auctions is the same for all frequencies. "If there's spectrum -whether it's returned spectrum from NextWave, 1.9 GHz or 2.1 GHz -the commission is required by law to auction it," Nelson said. Whether such a legal challenge would be successful is debatable. Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, recently wrote FCC Chairman Michael Powell a letter that said an auction may not be necessary. "If Nextel must give up its spectrum in the 700 and 800 bands to eliminate interference to first responders, it must be given replacement spectrum elsewhere," Stevens' letter stated. "As author of the spectrum auction program, I do not believe an auction would be required in this instance." That may be true, but the legal argument is cloudy enough that courts would hear the case and its appeal. That could be problematic for public safety because many believe Nextel may not be willing to begin paying for 800 MHz rebanding until it is certain it will receive replacement spectrum. Such certainty may not occur for a year or two, if a spectrum award is litigated. However, Precursor's Baca said he does not believe a court would let the replacement-spectrum debate delay the all- important rebanding. Instead, he believes any judges hearing the case will separate the issues - allowing the 800 MHz rebanding to proceed while presiding over the 1.9 GHz debate. "God forbid, if we have another 9/11, no judge wants the story to say, `Judge So-and-So blocked a plan that would have solved the communications interference problem that caused people to die,"' Baca said. Would Nextel be willing to pay for rebanding without an assurance that it would receive desired replacement spectrum? O'Regan deflected numerous questions on the matter, noting that the company does "not comment on hypotheticals." "The Consensus Plan was designed as a whole, as a comprehensive solution to solve interference," http://iwce-mrt.com/microsites/magazinearticle.asp?mode=print&magazinearticleid=198444... 6/24/04 800 MHz resolution delayed -again Page 4 of 5 O'Regan said. "If [the FCC] adopts something else, we would have to look at it at that time." Knowing that a court challenge could delay rebanding at least another year, there is a very real chance that public-safety officials could view Verizon as the problem if it pursues litigation. Gurss said some pubic-safety representatives have told him that "whoever holds this up will be held accountable." Exactly what public-safety representatives would do is unclear, but it would be a mistake for anyone to characterize Verizon as an entity that does not want a solution to interference problems it has addressed at its own expense on a case-by-case basis for years, Nelson said. "We are not the enemy of public safety," he said. Nelson said it would be unfair to criticize Verizon if the carrier decides to oppose an "illegal plan." Instead, public safety should remember that Nextel is the source of the interference problem and is offering a "dishonorable proposal" to solve it in a manner that calls for the FCC to violate spectrum- auction laws. "The goal has to be a quick solution for law enforcement that is legal," Nelson said. "It shouldn't be that difficult." Perhaps, but the fact that the FCC's deliberation in this proceeding is almost two years old indicates otherwise. The problem for public safety is that the Consensus Plan is the only realistic option to the 800 MHz interference problem, McEwen said. McEwen said he understands Verizon's concerns about Nextel getting 1.9 GHz spectrum but noted that Verizon and other commercial wireless carriers have not offered alternatives - a fact that speaks volumes as public safety is treated like a political football on the issue. "We're being kicked around here from goalpost to goalpost," McEwen said. "In the meantime, the only solution we have is Nextel's." Meanwhile, public-safety officials continue to wring their hands, worried that the unsolved 800 MHz interference problem will result in the fatality or serious injury of a civilian or first responder. "It's only a matter of time," Gurss said. The latest close call occurred in March, when an Elks Lodge in Mesquite, Texas, caught fire. Firefighters' radios at the scene did not work - a circumstance attributed to interference from a nearby cellular tower used by Nextel, Gurss said. Because the fire spread quickly, the firefighters attacked the blaze from outside the building. If the units had reached the scene in time to get inside the building, the firefighters would have been at risk with no radio communications, Gurss said. "Had they rushed inside, it would have been really dangerous," he said. "No one would have been able to order them to get out, and they wouldn't have been able to radio for help." Although Nextel later fixed the problem, "that didn't help the firefighters" at the scene, Gurss said. Such incidents underscore the need for a proactive solution such as rebanding that is executed as quickly as possible. Because there seems to be little question that the matter will land in court regardless, Gurss said he favors the FCC issuing an order soon. http://iwce-mrt.com/microsites/magazinearticle.asp?mode=print&magazinearticleid=198444... 6/24/04 800 MHz resolution delayed -again Page 5 of 5 "We're not afraid of litigation, and the commission shouldn't be, either," Gurss said. "The FCC shouldn't be scazed off by threats of litigation. They need to decide to do what they know is right." © 2004, Primedia Business Magazines and Media, a PRIMEDIA company. All rights reserved. This article is protected by United States copyright and other intellectual property laws and may not be reproduced, rewritten, distributed, redisseminated, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast, directly or Indirectly, in any medium without the prior written permission of PRIMEDIA Business Corp. ©2004 Primedia Business Magazines and Media. All Rights Reserved. For Search Partners (Contact Us For Ad http://iwce-mrt.com/microsites/magazineazticle.asp?mode=print&magazineazticleid=198444... 6/24/04 Bridging devices in disparate bands Page ] of 5 -N±AA#'rP Lti ?J4i-aoL:WS Oh'0.-SE{URdIYIt.lt Ltk:f Yet f ~ M~r..rrxf iveete~ Bridging devices in disparate bands By Harold Kinley Mobile Radio Technology, May 1, 2004 Despite the steady migration ofpublic-safety radio organizations to 800 MHz trunking systems over the past few years, many public-safety radio systems still operate in the VHF and UHF bands. Fortunately, the national frequency plan developed by the National Public Safety Planning Advisory Committee and adopted by the Federal Communications Commission in 1987 calls for certain 800 MHz frequencies to be set aside for the purpose of interoperability - or "mutual aid" -between public-safety entities operating in various frequency bands. To review the requirements and objectives, I have excerpted a portion of Appendix C of NPSPAC's Channel Planning Analysis, as follows in the next section. (Visit www.pswn.gov/admin/librarydocs/800appendixc.pdf for the full document.) The national plan requires that regional plans contain several sections concerning the implementation of the fave nationwide mutual-add channels. These sections typically define the use of each of these channels and provide detailed standards and operating procedures to govern the use of these channels. Common Channel Implementation -The national plan sets forth the guidelines_for using and implementing the five National Common Channels (see Figure 1). Four of these channels are dedicated as National Tactical Channels and one channel is dedicated as the National Calling Channel. The National Common Channels are to be available for use throughout the region. The National Calling Channel, channel 601, is to be dmplemented as a full mobile relay, with wide area coverage transmitters to maximize coverage. Large system users eve or more channels) are required to monitor thds channel and could be required to provide satellite receiver feeds into the wide coverage area. f~atmel Y M~n.._ . - 11M~ ~ ~ ~ . 521.41 411a'~ _ 3 ;.2;° TAC3>. The four National Tactical Channels are to be assigned throughout the region for use by all eligible entities. Large system users could be required to sponsor one or two localdzed mobile relays to cover ATT. J http://iwce-mrt.com/microsites/magazinearticle.asp?mode=print&magazinearticleid=198420... 6/24/04 Bridging devices in disparate bands Page 2 of 5 specific geographic areas. The users of these channels must fie eligible for licensing on other 800 MHz public-safety channels, but no special licensing is required. Operation on Common Channels -The feve common channels are only to be used for activities requiring intersystem communications between entities not already sharing communications systems and are not to be used for any daily operations. In emergencies, the channels may be assigned by the primary public-safety agency in that area. On all common channels, plain English and familiar words and phrases should be used. The calling channel is used to establish contact with other users and determine which tactical channel to use. It is not to be used as an ongoing working channel. Tactical channels are reserved for interagency communications and are used as directed by the primary public- safety agency in the area. Tactical channels can be assigned by the various public-safety services, or they can be assigned by county or area. Network Operating Method -A wide area network will be established on the National Calling Channel. The tactical channel communications systems will be implemented by volunteer entities, and each primary geographic section of the region is covered by at least one tactical channel. Coded Squelch on Mutual-Aid Channels -The National Common Tone Squelch of 156.7 Hz will be used on all equipment operating on the,rve common channels. If these frequencies are used nationally, as the plan requires, then interoperability comes down to providing a link or bridge from public-safety radio systems operating in bands other than 800 MHz. In Figure 2, a conventional VHF radio is interconnected to a conventiona1800 MHz radio to form a translator. The function of the translator is to receive radio transmissions on the 800 MHz system and retransmit (translate) them over the VHF radio system. The translator works bidirectionally - that is, it also picks up radio transmissions on the VHF radio system and retransmits them through the 800 MHz radio. http://iwce-mrt.com/microsites/magazinearticle.asp?mode=print&magazinearticleid=198420... 6/24/04 Bridging devices in dispazate bands Page 3 of 5 arr.:, 4' i wFlFr~db #i9~ ~ r~?.Sai~tai"dl~, ':~Y:i +r rrr yy'i .r'w w,L«.rr R. - ,s; ~ ~ i 4F~ ~({MNt t R8~0 ! r RBE~D 1 r IIABIF ~ 1 t 'i' l~' f t l ` ~ . y ~ 'r aw +w rip; lii w iiv ++wr+M? As shown in Figure 2, the audio output of the VHF transceiver in the translator is fed to the exciter input of the 800 MHz transceiver. The control circuitry keys the 800 MHz transceiver, thus transmitting the signal to the 800 MHz mobile relay station. The 800 MHz mobile relay station then retransmits the 800 MHz signal to the 800 MHz mobile (or portable) radio transceiver. The signal follows the path of the blue arrows. When the 800 MHz mobile transceiver is transmitting, the reverse operation takes place, and the signal follows the path of the red arrows. Figure 3 shows another setup in which the translator is the only bridge between the 800 MHz radio and the VHF radio. The 800 MHz mobile relay station is omitted from the loop. It is important to note that the translator setups described above will only work on conventional 800 MHz frequencies. http://iwce-mrt.com/microsites/magazinearticle.asp?mode=print&magazinearticleid=198420... 6/24/04 Bridging devices in disparate bands Page 4 of 5 Ind naue4?~94® ~r ~ d~ , ~.r .r war w+w ris.. iy ~ 1 ~ ~ r E- 1. ~ ~ j l~ N1Nz t 't r a T ice` i t a r . ; . More elaborate methods must be employed to link a conventional system at other bands to an 800 MHz franking system. One solution can be found in the SmartBridge franked radio interconnect systems from Melbourne, Australia-based Radio Systems Technologies. For example, the SB 100 Talk Group extender -designed for the company's SmartNet/SmartZone franked radio networks -can be installed at any conventional site within radio range of a franked site. When the bridge is operating in the connect state, any radio operating within the repeater's radio range becomes an extension of the TalkGroup. Thus, the conventional radio effectively behaves as though it were a franked radio itself. The connect on/off state is controlled by using "over-the-air" dual-tone multi-frequency signaling. A unique "franked system busy" protocol ensures that users of conventional radios are immediately informed of unsuccessful attempts by audible alerts. (For more information visit www.rstradio.com.) Another device that has gained popularity is the TRP-1000 transportable interconnect system from JPS Communications, adivision of Raytheon. The TRP-1000 provides interoperable communications between organizations using different radios on disparate frequencies. It is aself-contained, portable unit consisting of a power source and multiple radios pre-wired to the company's ACU-1000 solution. The ACU-1000 is designed to provide on-scene interoperability by linking radios, SATCOM, cellular, Wi-Fi and landline phones directly and over IP networks. The TRP-1000, integrated with the ACU-1000, can serve as a bridge between conventional systems as well as between conventional systems and franked systems. (More information on the TRP-1000 and ACU-1000 can be found at www.jps.com.) http://iwce-mrt.com/microsites/magazinearticle.asp?mode=print&magazinearticleid=198420... 6/24/04 Bridging devices in disparate bands Page 5 of 5 Although franked radio systems (800 MHz and other bands) currently serve a large number of public- safety agencies, many agencies continue to operate conventional radio systems in the VHF and UHF bands. Of these, many - if not most -are pleased with their radio systems and don't want to move to 800 MHz franking systems. Consequently, until the time comes when all public-safety agencies are on the same radio system, bridging devices such as those described in this space will be required to achieve interoperability. Until next time -stay tuned! 2004, Primedia Business Magazines and Media, a PRIMEDIA company. All rights reserved. This article is protected by United States copyright and other intellectual property laws and may not be reproduced, rewritten, distributed, redisseminated, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast, directly or indirectly, in any medium without the prior written permission of PRIMEDIA Business Corp. ©2004 Primedia Business Magazines and Media. All Rights Reserved. For Search Partners ~ Contact Us ~ For Ad http://iwce-mrt.com/microsites/magazinearticle.asp?mode=print&magazinearticleid=198420... 6/24/04 Untitled Document Page 1 of 5 Safarik, Gary From: MRT Bulletin [mrt_bulletin@newsletters.primediabusiness.com] Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 11:20 AM To: Safarik, Gary Subject: MRT Bulletin: Lawyer rebuts FCC stance on 800 MHz interference ~ MOBILE pAGq'TECFLNOLODY June~4, 2~004-~1 A PRIMEDIA Property Volume 2, Number 25 l=rQ~ ~I~ n., , xati CONTENTS From our magazines: ADVERTISEMENT Lawyer rebuts FCC The new MAXRAD (B)MEFC24005 is a 2.4 stance on 800 MHz enforcement GHz elevated feed mobile antenna designed for installations requiring elevation of the antenna Motorola Canopy radios over surrounding objects that could prevent receive encryption true omnidirectional coverage. Providing 5 dBi certification of gain, this antenna is ideal for public safety M/A-COM announces vehicles with overhead light bars that often customer wins obstruct the RF signal. It operates both on and off a ground plane without degradation in Report: Sprint cuts VSWR performance. Cail 1-800-323-9122 or price for P2T service visit www.maxrad.com/cgi/maxrad_products Wireless LAN switch introduced Wavelengths AirNet lands purchase Lawyer rebuts FCC stance on orders worth $3 million 800 MHz enforcement By Glenn Bischoff Checkpoint Systems June 4, 2004 debuts RFID printer solutions Last week in this space, I shared the click Here for more perspective of an FCC source as to industry news why the commission has chosen not to institute an enforcement proceeding against Nextel Communications, which is blamed for most of the interference that disrupts public- About This safety communications in the 800 MHz band Newsletter across much of the nation. To summarize, my source told me there is a general feeling within You are subscribed to the commission that the FCC has the necessary this newsletter as legal standing to force Nextel to fix the gsafarik@interpac.net 6/23/04 ATT' x Untitled Document Page 2 of 5 To unsubscribe click problem, but that a negotiated settlement here: tJnsubscribe which would satisfy all parties and keep the To subscribe to this matter out of the courts no small goal is newsletter, click Here: preferred. Subscribe Several readers responded to the column. For information on Some bought into the FCC's rationale, others advertising in tnis thou ht it was nonsense. This week in the newsletter, please g r contact: John Piotrowski interest of fair play and healthy debate, I have or Dennis Hegg decided to share one of the more thoughtful and well reasoned rebuttals, written by Robert For information on Schwaninger, a Washington, D.C.-based exhibiting at or attending IWCE 2005, attorney with long-standing ties to the land click here! mobile radio industry. His thoughts are as follows: "The FCC's comment that Nextel is operating within the scope of its licenses is analogous to a person with a properly operating handgun and gun permit being authorized to discharge the weapon in a crowd. Simply put, Nextel's licenses do not authorize the transmission of electromagnetic energy outside of the authorized bandwidth defined by those licenses. Such transmissions are, by definition, contrary to the dictates of Section 301 of the Communications Act of 1934. In short, Nextel has constructed a system that creates harmful interference with impunity, and the results were known prior to implementation. "The history of Nextel, nee Fleet Call, is well known to the industry. The FCC granted a waiver to Fleet Call in 1991 that opened the door to integrated digital operations. To obtain the waiver, Fleet Call expressly stated to the FCC that its system would not cause interference to analog operations. This pledge, upon which Nextel was built, has been breached. "If no one at the FCC envisioned what would happen if the agency allowed digital operations in adjacent channels at 800 MHz, it was because they did not read the comments opposing Fleet Call's waiver request. More than one commenting party predicted the interference that would result. For the agency to claim surprise or ignorance is simply not supported by the record. "As to interleaving of channels being the problem, the FCC is again ignoring the dictates of its own rules. Licensees are allowed to operate on a channel at a particular location, 6/23/04 Untitled Document Page 3 of 5 provided they comply with the FCC's rules for operation and protection of existing licensees. Thus, when Nextel accepted the interleaved channels, decisions concerning whether and how to use those channels were wholly Nextel's. If those decisions are contrary to rule or law, the responsibility for the errant decision (s) must fall solely on the licensee, Nextel. "Of shocking silliness is the comment that an enforcement action requires a formal complaint to be filed. This is ludicrous. The agency has all authority to employ its enforcement authority on its own motion. The FCC hands out fines all the time for persons' failure to properly paint and light radio towers. None of these arose out of a formal complaint. Pirate broadcasters have gone to jail without a formal complaint being filed. "There are several reasons why public safety has failed to file a formal complaint: public- safety entities have received questionable advice from their representatives; Nextel has given the appearance of cooperation with public-safety entities; formal complaint proceedings are expensive; and public safety stands to gain additional spectrum at 800 MHz. Public safety receiving additional spectrum always has been the driving force behind APCO's support of the Consensus Plan. Ask Bob Gurss if he would support the plan without it. He wouldn't. But this yardstick for acceptability has always diverted attention from the primary goal of the proceeding, which is to resolve interference. No entity should come out ahead on the deal, including public safety, given the risk to business/industrial analog operators borne by adoption of the Consensus Plan. "While Nextel, the FCC, and APCO are talking about interoperability, first responders, God, motherhood, and public service, the opposition is talking about law, precedent, and statutory authority. Which argument is most likely to win in a court of law? The courts have one litmus test is it legal? The Consensus Plan isn't and neither is Nextel's method of operation." Robert Schwaninger is president of Schwaninger & Associates, a Washington D.C. law firm that is general counsel to Small Business in Telecommunications, an association representing potentially affected 800 MHz analog operators and a commenting 6/23/04 Untitled Document Page 4 of 5 party in the 800 MHz proceeding. He can be reached at rschwaninger@sa-lawyers.net. ADVERTISEMENT °i~ ~,iP+a ~ rte ~ ~ . ' The Genesis Group - F m - SmartNet and Smart2one Management Tools Where are your radios? Why do you get busies? Who is really using your system? Compare last year's and this year's usage. Wireless Console Enhancement. Detailed ATIA history reporting. Control Channel Archiving. We have software tools to answer all this and more... MUCH more... at...www.GenesisWOrld.com In the news Motorola Canopy radios receive encryption certification M/A-COM announces customer wins Report: Sprint cuts price for P2T service Wireless LAN switch introduced AirNet lands purchase orders worth $3 million Checkpoint Systems debuts RFID printer solutions Click here for more industry news ADVERTISEMENT , 3 Radio Waves -The ~ Leader in Microwave 4 Antenna Innovation Radio Waves is a proven supplier of reliable microwave and broadband wireless antennas for cellular base station interconnects, Internet 6/23/04 Untitled Document Page 5 of 5 service providers, WiFi systems, campus environments, private networks, disaster recovery and many other applications. Through our superior quality and excellent customer service, Radio Waves is "The Leader in Microwave Antenna Innovation." http: //www. rad iowavesi nc. co m To get this newsletter in a different format (Text, AOL or HTML), or to change your a-mail address, please visit your profile page to change your delivery preferences. For questions concerning delivery of this newsletter, please contact our Customer Service Department at: US Toll Free: (866) 505-7173 International: (402) 505-7173 or custserv@newsletter.primediabusiness.com Primedia Business Magazines & Media 9800 Metcalf Avenue Overland Park, KS 66212 Copyright 2004, PRIMEDIA. All rights reserved. This article is protected by United States copyright and other intellectual property laws and may not be reproduced, rewritten, distributed, re-disseminated, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast, directly or indirectly, in any medium without the prior written permission of Primedia Business Magazines & Media Inc. 6/23/04