1 Spectrum Management 2008 Industry Association Roundtable Paul J. Sinderbrand Wilkinson Barker...

1

Spectrum Management 2008

Industry Association Roundtable

Paul J. SinderbrandWilkinson Barker Knauer, LLP

202.783.4141psinderbrand@wbklaw.com

2

• Membership – Wireless Broadband System Operators, Application Providers and Manufacturers

• Objective – promote legislative and regulatory environment that facilities a competitive marketplace for wireless broadband services

• Philosophies• Technological neutrality• Parity among like services, tempered

by appreciation of differences

• Primary Recent Spectrum Focus• 700 MHz• Future of D Block and Private/Public Safety

Partnership• Comments - June 20; Reply comments -

July 7.• WCS (2.3 GHz)• AWS-3 (2155-2175 MHz)• BRS/EBS (2.5 GHz)• LMDS and 39 GHz

• 4/11/2008 WTB Order extends deadline for LMDS substantial service to 6/1/2012 for those who requested

3

WCS/SDARS

4

5

WCS-DARS Coexistence

• 2305-2320/2345-2360 MHz Is Poised To Become A Home To WiMAX Mobile Services, but . . .• DARS Terrestrial Repeater Technical Limits

Must Be Adopted To Protect WCS From Interference.

• WCS OOBE Limits Are More Restrictive Than Necessary To Protect DARS And Must Be Loosened.

WCS/SDARS NPRM

• 12/18/07 NPRM solicits comment on proposals by WCS Coalition and by XM and Sirius for rules to govern WCS and SDARS repeaters.• OOBE restrictions on mobile WCS• Power levels for SDARS repeaters• Power levels for WCS base stations and

mobiles

6

7

WCS OOBE Limits

• OOBE limits between 2320 MHz and 2345 MHz were adopted in 1997 before WCS or DARS technologies were settled:• Fixed stations: 80 + 10 log (p) dB • Mobile stations: 110 + 10 log (p) dB

• Restrictions effectively preclude use of C and D Blocks for mobile and impose undue economic costs on A and B Blocks.

• Testing demonstrates that, under real world conditions, current limits are not necessary to protect DARS.

WCS Power Limits

• DARS proposed to reduce maximum current handheld power levels from 250 milliwatt EIRP limit imposed by RF exposure rule to 10 milliwatts/1 milliwatt

• Adoption of proposal would preclude viable mobile wireless broadband service

• Testing has shown that DARS receivers can operate with muting even when faced with WCS handhelds operating at currently-authorized levels.

8

9

DARS Terrestrial Repeaters

• Ten years after DARS first authorized to use “gap fillers,” FNPRM is still pending on technical rules.

• Evidence is clear that high-powered DARS repeaters can result in blanketing interference to WCS.

• In 2001, FCC granted XM and Sirius STAs allowing terrestrial operations (40,000 Watts EIRP in some cases), subject to obligation to cure interference to WCS.

• DARS now insists on grandfathering all existing repeaters, without protection obligation.

10

2.5 GHz Restructuring

FORMER PLAN

2.5 GHz Bandplan Transition

• Timeline• January 20, 2009 – Deadline for submitting Initiation Plans• January 21, 2009 – 90 day window opens for licensees to

notify FCC and affected licensees of intent to self-transition• April 20, 2009 – Deadline for licensees to notify FCC and

affected licensees of intent to self-transition.• October 21, 2010 -- All transitions should be complete

(except in cases of disputes that toll the completion deadline)

• Transition to new bandplan is proceeding quickly• 402 of 493 Initiation Plans filed• 253 Post-Transition Notifications filed

11

12

Flexibility/Protection

• Cochannel Interference• Limiting signal strength at service area boundary to 47

dBµV/m does not protect base station from interference by non-synchronized cochannel base station.

• Height benchmarking provides additional protection against base-to-base interference.

• If height of antenna above average terrain along the radial between stations exceeds D²/17, station is outside of height benchmark (where D is distance to GSA boundary)

• Base station exceeding benchmark must restrict received signal level to -107 dBm or less at base station that is within benchmark

• Adjacent Channel Interference• 43+10log(p) mask generally applies to base stations• If OOBE interference is caused, must meet 67+10log(p)

measured 3 MHz from block edge.

13

3/20/08 Third R&O and FNPRM in WT Docket No. 03-66

• On recon, FCC establishes deadlines for response to documented interference:• Require compliance with the more restrictive

mask/height benchmarking within 24 hours where a new or modified base station interferes with an existing base station;

• Allows operator of existing base station 60 days to comply with more restrictive mask when OOBE interference is caused to a new base station;

• Allows operator of existing base station 90 days to comply with height benchmarking when cochannel interference results at a new base station;

• FCC confirms that in other cases of documented interference, both licensees have an obligation to cooperate in good faith to reasonably mitigate the interference.

3/20/08 Third R&O and FNPRM in WT Docket No. 03-66

• 75+ forfeited BRS BTA licenses to be reauctioned using typical rules.• Late 2008 or early 2009

• FNPRM seeks comment on licensing EBS white space• Can auction be avoided?• BTAs or something else?• How much spectrum?• Priority for local and/or accredited

institutions?• Upfront payments? Bidding credits?

14

15

BRS Relocation From 2150-2162 MHz

• Ninth Report and Order in ET Docket No. 00-258 Fails To Protect Incumbents – WCA petition for reconsideration pending• Since AWS has 15 years to relocate BRS, FCC

must permit BRS to secure replacement for throughput increased during interim.

• BRS incumbents should be permitted to “self-relocate” just as point-to-point microwave can.

• Internal costs must be recoverable.• Incumbent should get pre-payment to avoid

having to fund its own involuntary relocation.

16

BRS Relocation From 2150-2162 MHz

• Adjacent channel interference must be cured by AWS, but only after the fact – jeopardizing existing operations! FCC should require prior coordination by AWS with BRS under Section 101.103(d) notice and response system, just as AWS must do with point-to-point microwave

4/10/08 Globalstar ATC R&O

• Allows ATC in 2483.5-2495 MHz band• Rejects ATC at 2495-2500 MHz; thus keeps ATC

out of new BRS channel 1 at 2496-2502 MHz• Retains requirement that Globalstar cure any

interference that ATC causes and imposes BRS 24 hour/60 day deadlines

• Acknowledges that Globalstar may be effectively limited to below 2493 MHz

• Punts concerns on use of TDD, Open Range relationship and gating tests• Globalstar filed application last Friday to modify

ATC authority

17

18

THANK YOU!

Paul J. SinderbrandWilkinson Barker Knauer, LLP202.783.4141psinderbrand@wbklaw.com