SpectrumTalk

2008-10-08T17:02:00.003-04:00

TV Week Reports on House Panel FCC Investigation

On October 7, TV Week reported that

"A House Energy and Commerce Committee panel is readying a report expected to question whether Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin J. Martin went too far in keeping FCC decisions and policymaking to a close-knit group of subordinates.

A committee official today confirmed that a report on a 10-month-long probe of Mr. Martin’s management style would likely be issued later this month, replacing what was originally planned to be a committee hearing on Mr. Martin’s management."

Rep. John Dingell had previously said,

“Given several events and proceedings over the past year, I am rapidly losing confidence that the commission has been conducting its affairs in an appropriate manner ... A trend appears to be emerging of short-circuiting procedural norms, suggesting a larger breakdown at the agency. … Commissioners are not informed of the details of draft items until it is too late to provide the necessary scrutiny and analysis.”

So it looks like the Commission's ploy of delaying responses to information requests and then flooding the committee with 40 boxes of papers may have avoided awkward public hearings. Hopefully the next chairman will learn something positive from this.

2008-10-04T17:12:00.002-04:00

Ofcom Continues its Leadership Role in Spectrum Policy with Bold Proposals for 275-3000 GHz

FCC was once the world's leader in innovative spectrum policy and admired by its counterparts throughout the world. But the UK's Ofcom may be taking that title away with a massive wave of activity in a variety of spectrum policy areas. Shown here is the summary of a 9/26 document proposing that spectrum from 275 to 3000 GHz be all unlicensed.

It makes sense -- most of the reasons for starting radio licensing don't apply to such high frequencies where propagation is very different and most systems very directional.

But more importantly, why don't we see bold ideas coming from FCC these days?

2008-10-03T11:51:00.003-04:00

How the SEC May Have Triggered the Current Financial Mess:

Doesn't This SEC Meeting Sound a Lot Like FCC Meetings Recently

The New York Times has an interesting theory about how SEC deregulation may have set the foundation for the current financial crisis. I am not sure it is true, but the video linked to the above SEC picture explains the theory and has audio from SEC deliberations. The SEC Chairman and staff explain that they can monitor the deregulated firms and catch any problems early.

Much of this sounds very familiar to those of us who have watched the FCC for the past decade.

2008-10-02T10:22:00.005-04:00

FCC Announces Appointment of
Prof. Jon Peha
as Chief Technologist

Yesterday, FCC issued a press release announcing the appointment of Carnegie-Mellon University Professor Jon M. Peha as Chief Technologist. This position was created in the late 1990s, but has been vacant for more than 5 years - a sign of possible indifference to technical policy issues on the "8th floor".

The release states

Dr. Peha will serve as a senior advisor on communications technology in the FCC’s Office of Strategic Planning and Policy Analysis. FCC Chairman Kevin J. Martin praised Dr. Peha for his expertise in the area of communications technology, saying, “Jon brings a wealth of knowledge and experience to the Commission and Iam pleased he has agreed to join us as Chief Technologist. am confident that Dr. Peha’s expertise will be beneficial to the Commission as it moves forward to address numerous complex, technical issues.”

Currently, Dr. Peha is a Professor in the Departments of Engineering and Public Policy, and Electrical & Computer Engineering at Carnegie Mellon University (CMU). He also serves as the Associate Director of the Center for Wireless and Broadband Networking at CMU. Prior to joining CMU’s Department of Engineering and Public Policy, Dr. Peha served as the Chief Technical Officer of three high-tech start-ups and as a member of the technical staff at SRI International, AT&T Bell Laboratories and Microsoft.

Dr. Peha’s research interests include technical and policy issues related to computer and telecommunications networks. He has written extensively on these subjects and is the co-author of Science Technology Advice for Congress. He has also authored several articles in the following publications: IEEE Personal Communications; Telecommunications Policy; the International Journal of Communication; and Wireless Technology.

Dr. Peha received his Ph.D. in electrical engineering from Stanford University and his undergraduate degree from Brown University. He is a Congressional Fellow of the IEEE and a Diplomacy Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Why Chairman Martin waited until the 11th hour of his chairmanship to pick a top technical adviser is unclear as well as to whether Jon can establish a good relationship with the next chairman given these circumstances.

But this is a positive sign. Welcome to DC!

2008-09-28T17:41:00.007-04:00

Election Time Means Outplacement and Burrowing at FCC

On August 12, xchange magazine's website reported that Andrew Kreig was "stepping down" as president and CEO of the Wireless Communications Association and that "Fred Campbell, a former wireless bureau chief at the FCC, will take over in the interim while the WCA looks for a permanent replacement." Telephony Online reported that "Campbell is a likely candidate for the position, saying he would accept the role if offered." The Japanese call this type of outplacement amakudari (天下り), meaning "descent from heaven".

The item shown at left from the FCC web site confirms this news and shows that my former OET colleague, Jim Schlichting, has taken over as Acting Bureau Chief in WTB. Just as I had been exiled from OET many years ago (for the audacity of creating the foundation of Wi-Fi) , Jim had been exiled to OET in 2003 from WTB. Congratulations, Jim, on your triumphant return to the top rank in the bureau.

An interesting question: Why is there not news of any of this on the FCC website?

WTB Headlines for August 2008

Also to watch out for in this season is political types "borrowing in " to career jobs at FCC. While FCC has a longstanding unwritten policy that commissioners' assistants can convert to career jobs - many have become outstanding civil servants in the past - this does not extend to other noncareer employees who are supposed to apply through the merit system. There are increasing reports of odd people from the White House and elsewhere magically showing up as career civil servants at FCC in this election season.

2008-09-26T13:01:00.002-04:00

FCC Tries Again on D Block

FCC has released new proposals for public safety use of the 700 MHz D block as the previous disastrous auction attempt. The new proposals will use auction results to determine what technology will be used and whether the licenses will be national or regional:

A primary goal of the Commission is to promote the deployment of a broadband network that provides maximum coverage to first responders across the country. Today’s Notice proposes to retain a Public/Private Partnership framework for the 700 MHz band absent other sources of funding. Today’s Notice proposes a modified set of rules to govern the D Block and a revised auction plan for assigning D Block licenses. Specifically, the FCC proposes to use the competitive bidding process to determine whether, based on greatest population coverage and highest bid(s), the D Block spectrum would be licensed to a single licensee on a nationwide basis or to regional licensees on the basis of 58 public safety regions.

In the event the D Block is licensed on a regional basis, the auction results also would determine the particular air interface technologythat would be deployed across the nation by the D Block licensee(s) when building out the interoperable broadband network(s), which would facilitate the ability of public safety entities to communicate outside of their home regions.

Comments are due 30 days after Federal Register publication and reply comments 10 days later. Will it work this time? We will see.

It is odd that we can afford $700B for the financial crisis but not the $20-30 B needed to build a rational nationwide interoperable public safety system without resorting to these tricks.

2008-09-19T13:34:00.001-04:00

Senior U.K. Ofcom Official Giving Presentation on Spectrum Reform in DC Area

The Theory, Practice, Politics and Problems
of Spectrum Reform: A U.K. Regulator's Perspective

A Lecture by WILLIAM WEBB
Head of Research and Development and Senior Technologist, OFCOM,
the telecommunications regulator in the United Kingdom

Wednesday, November 12, 2008, 4 p.m.
George Mason University School of Law, 3301 Fairfax Drive, Arlington, Va.

Regulation of the radio spectrum is nearly 100 years old. For almost all of that century, the policy-maker has micro-managed spectrum use, defining services, technologies and business models deployed by wireless operators. The inefficiencies embedded in this approach have triggered calls for liberalization since the pioneering 1950s work of Ronald Coase.

Yet, efforts to relax administrative control have proven slow and often contentious. Progress has been made in recent years, however, and policy makers in some nations are now seeking to achieve bolder changes. The regulator in the United Kingdom, Ofcom, has emerged as a leader in this campaign. After the Labour Government commissioned a landmark 2002 study authored by economist Martin Cave, Ofcom moved aggressively to assist the emergence of property rights in frequencies, the institutional switch enabling market allocation of radio spectrum.

This lecture, delivered by a key Ofcom policy official and a noted spectrum technology expert in his own right, dissects the liberalization process in Great Britain and offers lessons learned. This experience promises great insight for the U.S. and other countries struggling to enact pro-consumer policy reforms.

Where: George Mason University School of Law, Room 120, 3301 Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 22201 (Orange Line: Virginia Square-GMU Metro).
When: Wednesday, November 12, 2008, 4 – 5:30 p.m., reception to follow
Admission is free, but seating is limited. Because of construction, parking is tight. See http://www.law.gmu.edu/geninfo/parking. See IEP Web page: http://iep.gmu.edu.
To reserve your spot, please email Drew Clark: iep.gmu@gmail.com.

2008-09-18T06:36:00.005-04:00

McCain and Wi-Fi

There has been a lot of press coverage of John McCain's aide's Gore-like Blackberry remark, but little about another McCain remark about his role in Wi-Fi. Yesterday's Washington Post quoted McCain as saying "Under my guiding hand, Congress developed a wireless spectrum policy that spurred the rapid rise of mobile phones and Wi-Fi technology". (Virtually the same words are also on McCain website.) Apparently he was talking about his chairmanship of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee. For the record, he was chairman in 1997-2001 and 2003-2005.

What happened to Wi-Fi policy during this period? Basically nothing except some technical fine tuning at FCC of the rules in 47 C.F.R. 15.247.

Wi-Fi was enabled by the rules, now codified as 15.247, adopted in Docket 81-413. The drafting of the original proposals was explicitly authorized by Chmn. Ferris as part of a Carter-era push for deregulation. The NPRM and R&O were adopted in 1981 and 1985 under Chmn. Fowler with no Congressional (and almost no industry) interest. Wi-Fi was successful mainly because of deregulatory rules followed by benign neglect from Congress and FCC. (A good source of information on the origins of Wi-Fi is the collection of papers from a George Mason University 4/08 conference.)

The specific standards for Wi-Fi as we know it came from a voluntary standards group, IEEE 802.11 whose deliberations started in 1990 and the first standard was published in 1997.

So when McCain was committee chairman the first time, Wi-Fi hit the market in a big way, but the Congress and FCC had nothing to do with the timing. The foundation was set in 1985 and subsequent FCC action was fine tuning of technical details. No legislation or Congressional pressure had any impact on Wi-Fi.

While Sen. McCain's tenure as Senate Commerce Committee Chairman might have contributed to the "rapid rise of mobile phones", it had nothing to do with the success of Wi-Fi other than the coincidence that Wi-Fi became a household term in the same time period.

2008-09-16T16:19:00.001-04:00

FCC Has Started Recruiting Lawyers from the 2008-9 Academic Year Class

When Will Engineer Recruiting Start?

Last week a press release announcing the recruiting of new lawyers for next year at FCC appeared on its web site. This is a reminder that in recent years FCC has been much more systematic about recruiting lawyers than recruiting engineers. Experienced lawyers and engineers are critical for effective policy deliberations at FCC. Most people agree that a mix of people entering at entry level and entering midcareer is helpful. Entry level hiring is also important for an agency with perpetual budget problems in that entry level salaries are less than midcareer salaries.

Readers may recall that I previously reported that 2008 entry level engineer recruiting began in March and in 2006 it began in in August. When will it begin this year? A high level staffer told me recently he expected it to begin soon, but the lack of any visible sign makes me fear that there has been a bureaucratic hangup. However, the lawyers are marking full speed ahead with their hiring. I hope regulatees and the press put pressure on FCC in this area.

FCC has to compete with other federal agencies for civil service engineers. Many of them will guarantee funding for master's degree program. Some have permission from Congress to pay at higher rates than the normal federal pay scale. FCC has a limited master's degree program because of continuing budget uncertainty. Technical conference attendance by FCC employees is also problematic under usual prioritizations of travel funding within FCC. (It is much easier to get funding to attend an industry trade show than to attend an IEEE or similar professional conference.)

At a meeting sponsored by George Mason University today, both Chairman Powell and Chairman Kennard spoke about the urgency for the Commission to rebuild its staff and motivate them. I hope FCC starts engineer recruiting promptly for this academic year and starts preparing an effective training programming, like it used to have, when the new graduates arrive in the Summer.

2008-09-14T12:10:00.006-04:00

Japan Tops Broadband Survey

[An article from 9/14/08 Japan Times]

AMSTERDAM (AP) "Quality" may be hard to define, but Japanese broadband Internet connections have it, according to a survey released Friday.

No matter how researchers from Oxford University's Said Business School tweaked their definitions, Japan came out best by far.

Sweden was next, followed by the Netherlands, Latvia and South Korea, with the United States ranked 16th and Britain 24th out of 42 countries covered. India was last place. [Emphasis added.]

The study was geared toward finding what broadband consumers experience "in the wild" as opposed to what companies advertise. It used data from 8 million tests done in May by Speedtest.net, the largest of many free connection-testing services on the web.

After debating with a group of experts about how consumers use the net today and how they would define "quality," the authors gave a heavy weighting toward download speed, but also considered upload speeds and "latency," a rough measure of response time.

"It's a first stab at coming up with country broadband quality scores," said professor Alastair Nicholson, who oversaw the students carrying out the study. He was presenting the findings at the start of the International Broadcasting Conference.

==================

Now I am a little suspicious of Japan's tendency to self promotion, but here is some data from the the Japanese regulator's (MIC) website:

Japan Trends in No. of Internet Users and Diffusion Rate (relative to population) (Individuals)

Types of Internet Connection Using a Home PC (Households) (Multiple choices allowed)

However, the potential broadband contribution to the Japanese economy can not be measured by just broadband availability. Japan, like some other economies, overregulates many economic sectors so they can not take advantage of new opportunities created by broadband. Thus, why was Amazon started in USA, not Japan? Because until recently all books, magazines and records in Japan had to sold at list price. Analogous regulations inhibit new business models in other sectors now in Japan A professor I was freindly with in Japan described the country of consisting of two independent economies that coexist side-by-side: The "100 yen economy" and the "200 yen economy".

The 100 yen economy consists of the well know companies such as Sony and Toyota that could be competitive in productivity at exchange rates of 100 yen/$. However, the bulk of the Japanese economy, 2/3 I recall, is purely domestic and would not be competitive with other countries unless the rate was 200 yen/$. The ongoing economic regulation in Japan is intended to protect the 200 yen economy from external competitors. It is a hopeless task and it results in they forgoing many of the potential jobs created by broadband. Some European countries, e.g. France, have similar problems with broadband and economic regulation. This is an area where the US clearly leads even though the broadband numbers are falling behind.

2008-09-13T10:29:00.003-04:00

Letter From Commissioner Copps to Chairman Martin Proposing Steps the FCC Should Take to Advance the DTV Transition

Yesterday the FCC website posted the letter mentioned in the title here.

Comm. Copps proposes the following actions in the next few months:

1. Conduct additional field testing
2. Dedicate a special FCC Team to the needs of at-risk communities
3. Ramp up the FCC Call Center
4. Prepare comprehensive DTV contingency plans
5. Create an online DTV Consumer Forum
6. Educate consumers on DTV trouble-shooting, including antenna issues and the
need to “re-scan” converter boxes and sets
7. Ensurethat broadcasters meet their construction deadlines
8. Encourage the rapid deployment of small, battery-powered DTV sets
9. Find a way to broadcast an analog message to consumers following the
transition

An attachment to the letter gives details on each proposal. Comm. Copps believes that each of these steps could be implemented by FCC on its own authority.

2008-09-11T11:57:00.008-04:00

Marcus Spectrum Solutions Files Petition Asking FCC to Pay More Attention to ex parte Violations

“I believe that transparency is best achieved through the creation and publication of clear rules. However, for the regulatory regime to be successful, these rules must also be strictly enforced. Based on personal experience, I know that the U.S. regulatory model has only been successful when the FCC has enforced its rules vigorously. Failure to enforce rules sends the inappropriate signal that companies may engage in anticompetitive behavior or other unlawful conduct with impunity.” -- Remarks of Commissioner Kathleen Q. Abernathy, Market Reform: A Tool for Achieving Universal Access Panel, ITU Global Symposium for Regulators. Geneva, Switzerland, December 8, 2003

A petition recently filed by your blogger's consulting operation asks the full FCC to review a decision by its Office of General Counsel (OGC) rejecting several ex parte complaints that dealt with late filed documents that also appeared to lack the detail about an oral meeting required by the FCC's ex parte rules:

"Memoranda must contain a summary of the substance of the
ex parte presentation and not merely a listing of the subjects
discussed. More than a one or two sentence  description
of the views and arguments presented is generally required."
-- 47 CFR 1.1206(b)(2)

Careful readers will recall that this issue started with a posting here almost 2 years ago in October 2006. The posting was the text of a letter to OGC pointing out that while NAB has a meticulous record of detailed timely filings of oral contact with FCC on ongoing rulemakings, MSTV appeared to be a serial violator of the 47 CFR 1.1206(b)(2) requirements with respect to both timeliness and detail. OGC finally got around to answering this letter more than 5 months later without addressing the specifics of the 16 MSTV filings listed that appeared to violate the rules. A later OGC letter explained the absence of any statement on these specific allegations stating,

“We understood your October 13, 2006 letter to express general concern about the enforcement of ex parte rules, with the particular meetings cited merely being examples.”

OGC has now rejected several subsequent ex parte complaints dealing with different later MSTV filings on grounds such as,

an undocumented requirement that only parties with standing in a proceeding can file complaints,
that there is an unspecified “statute of limitations” on the timeliness of complaints,
that the standard of compliance is the practice of other parties in the same proceeding,
that the presence of multiple complaints is important, and
that the complainant must prove substantial harm.

Perhaps these would be good policies, perhaps not. In any case they are policies that are embodied neither in the Commission’s regulations nor in its past decisions (let alone court decisions) nor even in advisory information on its website.

It is amusing to note that on the very day OGC both rejected the MSS complaint and discouraged MSS from filing future ones, MSTV made a late filing in CS Docket No. 98-120 in which they took the unusual step of "fuzzifying" the date of the actual meeting by referring to it as "Thursday" and not giving the actual date.

As far as I can tell, the last time FCC has even chastised anyone on late filed somments was in 2002. There is no evidence I can find that FCC has ever taken action under §1.1216 to punish in any way any party for repeated violations of ex parte rules. While the vast majority of ex parte filings at FCC are compliant, repeated violations by one party that escape even a warning letter may, in the words of Comm. Abernathy, send "the inappropriate signal that companies may engage in anticompetitive behavior or other unlawful conduct with impunity."

Readers are encouraged to form their own opinions of the issue here and contact FCC with their own thoughts. At present no docket number has been established for this issue and it is not anticipated that public comment will be requested. This also means that there is no online access via ECFS for information on this proceeding. However, I will post links to any documents I receive. Alternatively, readers may just respond to this posting on the link below.

Procedurally, the MSS petition is now a "restricted proceeding" and the rules of 47 CFR 1.1208 apply. In the off chance that FCC might enforce this section more than it enforces §1206, those communicating to FCC on this issue are advised to serve MSTV per §1208.
===============
ECFS-like Log of Documents on Petition

MSS Petition of 8/25/08
MSTV Opposition to Petition for Review 9/9/08
(Does not include several attachments that are past MSTV filings that are said to comply with rules)
MSS Reply to Opposition 9/16/08

2008-09-09T09:32:00.009-04:00

Wilmington, NC:
First in Flight,
First in DTV

Yesterday Wilmington, NC Mayor Bill Saffo and Chairman Martin flipped a ceremonial switch converting Wilmington to "all DTV". Wilmington has a population estimated at 99,623 in 2007 and the Wilmington Metropolitan Statistical Area has a 2007 estimated population of 339,511. Wilmington is the 135th-largest Designated Market Area in the country, with 179,760 TV homes, 0.159% of the U.S. TV universe.

TV Week reports,

"Three stations are not participating: W47CK, the UHF MyNetworkTV affiliate with a transmitter located near Wilmington; W51CW, an affiliate of the Trinity Broadcasting Network; and WUNJ-TV, the local outlet of the statewide public broadcasting system owned by the University of North Carolina.
Steve Volstad, the director of marketing and communications for UNC-TV, said the public broadcasters decided to pass on the Wilmington test because the system feeds emergency messages from the governor and hurricane season is in full swing. Many people rely on battery-powered televisions during hurricanes and other weather-related emergencies."

Thus the switch appears to only involve most of the over the air commercial stations -- which in Wilmington are only directly received by 7% of the population. We have been unable as yet to confirm whether Time Warner, the local cable system has switched to all DTV beyond the local "must carry" stations - that are required to be available in both analog and digital format on cable for at least 3 years. So the issue of what happens to cable subscribers with analog TVs but without set top boxes is somewhat uncertain except for the fact they will continue to receive the signals from NAB and MSTV members.

NAB and MSTV's favorite publication, Broadcasting & Cable, reported:

Call Centers Buzzing in Wilmington
Most Calls from viewers who lost access to WECT-TV
The phones have not all been silent since Wilmington, N.C., shut off its analog-TV signal at noon Monday.

Melody Prevatte said her call center at Southeastern Community College received about 75 calls, mostly Columbus County residents who could not watch WECT-TV (the local NBC affiliate). “One lady was near hysterical,” she added. “She continued calling -- I think she spoke to everyone on our campus.”

FCC officials stated that the Wilmington event was mainly a learning experience. FCC devoted unprecedented resources to consumer education in Wilmington and enlisted others to help out also. Whether this level can be sustained in other cites is yet to be seen. Chairman Martin has told Broadcasting & Cable that FCC is focusing its resources on "targeting the 81 markets we think are most at risk [with at least 100,000 over-the-air-only households or at least 15% of the market]". It is nice to know that there actually are communities where more than 15% of the population actually use over-the-air signals.

Wilmington, NC - First in DTV

(Courtesy of Wikipedia)

Broadcasting & Cable Blog on Wilmington Switchover

Related FCC Press releases:

VAST MAJORITY OF WILMINGTON, NC RESIDENTS WERE AWARE OF THE
EARLY DIGITAL TELEVISION TRANSITION IN THEIR VIEWING AREA

Remarks of Chairman Martin

Remarks of Commissioner Copps

YouTube Videos

WCNC-TV News Coverage of switchover

Network coverage of switchover showing DTV reception problems in Ohio

2008-09-06T06:51:00.004-04:00

Washington Post Reports D Block Policy Impasse Resolved at FCC

Today's Washington Post reports that in a conference call with reporter yesterday, Chairman Martin described a new approach to getting the D block into actual use so it will be available to public safety agencies.

New details on a plan to create a national communications network for police, fire and other emergency first responders were announced yesterday by the Federal Communications Commission after an earlier effort to sell the network this year failed to produce a buyer.

Under the new proposal, the network would be auctioned as one national block of radio spectrum or, alternatively, as 58 separate regional airwaves licenses. The agency said that it prefers to sell the spectrum as a whole and that it would give priority to such a bid. But if no one meets the minimum reserve price for the national block, the commission would close the auction with a minimum of half of the 58 regional licenses sold.

2008-09-05T10:09:00.004-04:00

Biennial Review Time Has Arrived!

47 USC 161 states

(a) Biennial review of regulations
In every even-numbered year (beginning with 1998), the Commission—

(1) shall review all regulations issued under this chapter in effect at the time of the review that apply to the operations or activities of any provider of telecommunications service; and

(2) shall determine whether any such regulation is no longer necessary in the public interest as the result of meaningful economic competition between providers of such service.

(b) Effect of determination
The Commission shall repeal or modify any regulation it determines to be no longer necessary in the public interest.

Early biennial reviews were open ended, but in 2002 the Commission decided to limit the scope of the review close to the statutory language,

in order to reduce confusion and improve administrative efficiency, we wish to confine this biennial Section 11 effort to the areas defined by the statute. Adding rules, as opposed to modifying or eliminating existing rules, is clearly beyond the immediate task.

The above linked decision is cited in the PN but there is not link to it. (That's why you need SpectrumTalk!) It also has several interpretations of the statute that the Commission has made.

With both presidential candidates advocating "change", the new Commission in 2009 might be more open to input in this proceeding than it has been in recent years.

So if you find some existing FCC rule is discouraging innovation and economic growth, now it the time to speak up.

Comment Date: October 6, 2008
Reply Comment Date: October 27, 2008

2008-09-04T16:32:00.002-04:00

FCC Home Page:
Does Anyone There
Want It to be Useful?

Just when I thought I had seen everything on the ever jumbled FCC home page, the item circled above appeared yesterday. It says,

9/3/08
The Office of Managing Director Releases Data to Assist Commenters on Issues Presented in Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Adopted on August 1, 2008.
Public Notice: Word | Acrobat

I suppose we all want to thank OMD for releasing this data, but what in the world is the FNPRM of 8/1/08 about? To save you wear and tear on your mouse, here's part of the PN:

In the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the Commission sought comment on ways that it can better determine and calculate the regulatory fees in a way that is aligned with the Commission’s regulatory activities. Specifically, the Commission asked whether certain fee categories bear too heavy a regulatory burden and if other fee categories should be responsible for a larger share of the total regulatory fees collected by the agency.
To assist prospective commenters in developing their analyses, the Office of Managing Director has prepared several charts and tables that present a breakdown of the costs incurred by the Commission’s regulatory activities.

Now if anyone at FCC cared about public access and use of its homepage, they could have hinted at this subject matter in the homepage headline.

2008-08-28T17:16:00.005-04:00

FCC/OET Personnel Change

In March I helped FCC publicize their recruitment of people to fill two key OET jobs, Chief, Electromagnetic Compatibility Div., and Chief, Technical Analysis Branch. I had not heard anything about these jobs being filled until today when I got a routine message from Bob Weller with the following signature block:

Putting two plus two together, I realized from my time as an FCC investigator that Bob must have been given on of the vacancies. Congratulating him I found out that the promotion was effective August 17. It has not formally been announced pending the filling of the other job, actually his boss. (The other position is tied up in a freeze on personnel actions and is apparently someone outside of the present OET staff.)

Careful readers may recall that I announced Bob's return to FCC last October. Bob Weller worked at FCC from 1984 to 1993 in a number of positions in the former Field Operations Bureau, now Enforcement Bureau. We had worked together on the "Playboy satellite jamming" case, US v. Haney, in the late 1980's where we successfully convicted the perpetrator of jamming Playboy's satellite uplink based on really good but esoteric technical evidence. It was a great moment for FCC enforcement, but since it predates the current EB, there is little interest or memory of what happened. (Oddly, I have twice been invited to be luncheon speaker at distant IEEE conferences to talk about this amusing intersection of technology and CSI-like investigation.) Bob finished his first FCC service as head of the FCC's Denver office. From 1993 to 2007 he was an Associate in the California engineering firm of Hammett & Edison, Inc.

So I welcome Bob to this key OET position and look forward to welcoming the other person when that position is announced.

2008-08-23T09:06:00.005-04:00

Japanese News Article:
Risk-averse Telecoms Stifling Innovation

As a former resident of Japan, I am a regular reader of the Japan Times website*. An interesting article showed up today about an interview with Takeshi Natsuno, who developed Japan's first Internet-linking cell phone service, i-mode, in 1999. As the graph below shows, i-mode was a big hit in Japan where it was the right product at the right time.

i-mode is offered in some other countries, but is now losing to more general Internet services. But it has a firm hold in the Japanese market with a lot of services that appeal to Japanese consumers.

In the article, Natsuno "expressed disenchantment with this nation's phone industry, which he said was dominated by stodgy conservatives who lacked the charisma and creative sensibilities of a Steve Jobs, chief executive at Cupertino, Calif.-based Apple."

"They have to take a risk," Natsuno said. "To do that, clear direction, clear vision, clear leadership are necessary."

Natsuno "believes Japan has only a few years left to take advantage of global business opportunities before rivals, including Nokia Corp. of Finland and South Korean Samsung Electronics Co., dominate and make it harder for Japanese mobile businesses to expand globally."

While this article is written about Japan, I think much might also apply to the US cellular industry too.

* Oddly, most readers of English language Japanese newspapers like the Japan Times are actually native Japanese seeking English practice. Japan Times is in the middle of the Japanese political road whereas the other English papers are affiliates of mainstream newspapers with strong political agenda that might make the Wall Street Journal editorial page seem objective by comparison.

Amazon.com Widgets

2008-08-22T12:31:00.008-04:00

Wireless Microphones:
FCC Finally Starts
Seeing Reality

Yesterday FCC released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Order in Docket 08-166 dealing with the wireless microphone issue. [Washington Post article.]

The gist of the document is given below:

"2. In this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Order (“Notice and Order”), we consider broadcast low power auxiliary stations, which have been permitted to operate on TV Channels 52-69 in the 700 MHz Band, as well as in several other bands, on a secondary non-interference basis. In the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Notice) below, we tentatively conclude to amend our rules to make clear that the operation of low power auxiliary stations within the 700 MHz Band will no longer be permitted after the end of the DTV transition because such operations could cause harmful interference to new public safety and commercial wireless services in the band. We also tentatively conclude to prohibit the manufacture, import, sale, offer for sale, or shipment of devices that operate as low power auxiliary stations in the 700 MHz Band. In addition, for those licensees that have obtained authorizations to operate low power auxiliary stations in spectrum that includes the 700 MHz Band beyond the end of the DTV transition, we tentatively conclude that we will modify these licenses so as not to permit such operations in the 700 MHz Band after February 17, 2009. We also seek comment on issues raised by the Public Interest Spectrum Coalition (PISC) in its informal complaint and petition for rulemaking (“PISC Petition” or “Petition”).

3. In the meantime, in the Order below, we impose a freeze, effective upon release of this Order, on the filing of new license applications that seek to operate on any 700 MHz Band frequencies (698-806 MHz) after the end of the DTV transition, February 17, 2009. In addition, we impose a freeze on granting any request for equipment authorization of low power auxiliary station devices that would operate in any of the 700 MHz Band frequencies. We also hold in abeyance, until the conclusion of this proceeding, any pending license applications and equipment authorization requests that involve operation of low power auxiliary devices on frequencies in the 700 MHz Band after the end of the DTV transition.

...

22. We seek comment on the various elements found in PISC’s Petition, particularly to the extent that we are not addressing those elements elsewhere in this Notice and Order. We note that the Commission’s Enforcement Bureau has initiated an investigation relating to the marketing practices of various manufacturers of wireless microphones. "

So almost 7 months after the start of the 700 MHz auction that produced income of $19 billion, FCC is finally getting around to kicking the wireless microphones out of the band they have sold to others for use starting in 2/09, less than 6 months from now.

But don't expect immediate action. The NPRM only proposes to stop legal use of channels 52-69 for wireless microphones. But since most use is already illegal the real impact is questionable. It proposes to stop approving new models and freezes all pending applications for equipment authorization, but previously approved models can be imported and sold by the thousands pending further action.

As quoted above, it also announces the opening of an investigation into the marketing practices of the wireless microphone manufacturers.

It does not raise the issue of innovative approaches to serving the legitimate needs of wireless microphone users such as:

new technology like the Sony digital wireless microphone sold in the UK or
the Audio-Technica UWB wireless microphone
using a coordinator/band manager for all wireless use who has the incentive to find ways to use spectrum more efficiently as the FCC's UK counterpart, Ofcom, has done
or access to sharing new bands, as Europe is considering for L band.

2008-08-18T14:43:00.010-04:00

6 Months to Go and Some DTV Confusion Continues

Now if you really want the straight story on the DTV conversion and your options as a cable consumer, you would think NCTA's website would be a more reliable source of information than the feuding FCC and NTIA websites. So back from my trip to the hinterlands of Arizona, California, and Utah, I checked out what happens if you are a cable subscriber.

So I clicked on the link shown above labeled "Digital Television Transition Resources". This brings you to another page:

Here you have 2 options: The top link is labeled "DTV transition" and takes you to a site sponsored by the DTV Transition Coalition consisting of a Who's Who in the broadcasting, cable, and consumer electronics area with a few consumer groups too. On this website, you will find the following information under "What You Need to Know":

"TV sets that currently receive programming through cable or satellite are not likely to be affected by the transition to digital."

If you take the bottom link entitled Cable Customers: Get Ready for Digital TV you get to an NCTA-sponsored website that has this information"

"If you are a cable customer, you may have to do little or nothing to enjoy your favorite programming after the switch to digital TV (DTV). Your cable provider will take care of the transition for you!
That's because your cable company already has technology in place to handle DTV. It does this by capturing these digital signals and sending them to your home through the same cable connection that delivers popular national channels like ESPN, CNN, HBO and hundreds of others. As long as your TV sets are connected to cable, they'll display local DTV stations, along with the many other stations cable has to offer."

FCC's www.dtv.gov website has this information:

"Cable subscribers may need new DTV equipment to view DTV programming in digital format. You should ask your cable provider what you will need and when."
"Analog TVs will continue to work with cable, satellite, VCRs, DVD players, camcorders, video games consoles and other devices for many years" (We will show below that "many years" in the case of cable could end in February 2012)

Another part of the FCC website says:

"Subscribe to a paid TV service. If your TV set receives local broadcast stations through a paid provider such as cable or satellite TV, it is already prepared for the DTV transition. (Emphasis added)

Finally on NTIA's website we read:

TVs connected to cable, satellite, or other pay services do not require a TV converter box from this program to receive programs after February 17, 2009. Check with your cable or satellite provider to determine how they will support your analog set after February 17, 2009.

Last week a senior FCC official spoke to a senior citizens group outside the Beltway and said,

"As I said, if you subscribe to a pay-tv service, such as Dish, DirecTV, or cableproviders like Comcast, your television will continue to work, regardless of whether it is analog or digital. "

So what is reality here? If you get cable and have a set top box, usually available at an extra charge, you will be able to continue to use your analog TV set indefinitely without any changes, other than perhaps channel number changes.

But if you have your analog TV set connected directly to the cable system and select channels directly with your TV set tuner, you might be in trouble in the near future. FCC did address this issue in their 12/31/07 CS Docket No. 98-120 Third Report and Order and Third Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Order Press Release).

The Commission stated,

By statute, cable operators must make local broadcasters’ primary video and program-related material viewable by all of their subscribers. The FCC’s ruling today allows cable operators to comply with the viewability requirement by choosing to either: (1)carry the digital signal in analog format, or (2) carry the signal only in digital format, provided that all subscribers have the necessary equipment to view the broadcast content. The viewability requirements extend to February 2012 with the Commission committing to review them during the last year of this period in light of the state of technology and the marketplace.

However, some customers without set top boxes might get overlooked in this process so NTIA's advice that they check with their cable company is still the best advice.

Note that the FCC requirement only deals with local over-the-air signals (e.g. signals from NAB and MSTV members), not C-SPAN, CNN, The Food Network, etc. So the quote from the DTV Transition Coalition above (actually linked through the NCTA site) that says "TV sets that currently receive programming through cable or satellite are not likely to be affected by the transition to digital." is at best a half truth. So is the FCC quote, "Analog TVs will continue to work with cable, satellite, VCRs, DVD players, camcorders, video games consoles and other devices for many years". But if your idea of TV is limited to what the 15% of American homes without cable or satellite actually see, then the information is correct.

More complicating details:

The FCC rule allows smaller cable companies (usually rural) to ask for a waiver so they may not be required to deliver analog signals to their customers. (Cable companies would prefer to carry only digital signals since they get several times the capacity with digital rather than analog and they can use the additional capacity for new channels and pay services.)
Another detail that gets loss in this mess of public information is that the NTIA-subsidized set top box is useless if you have cable service and an analog TV set since most cable services will carry digital signals in 64-QAM format, not the over-the-air 8-VSB format. (Try to explain that to you grandmother!)

So of all the statements above, NTIA's www.dtv2009.gov's is probably the best. I see how the senior FCC official had problems in the prepared speech. The official's staffers were probably hopelessly confused by the murky statements out there. But if they were confused, image the sonsumers, particularly older Americans who are also confused.

Hopefully the 9/8/2008 switchover in Wilmington, NC will show the problems here and allow corrective action before the national switchover.
===========
After I posted this today, FCC announced 2 new unprecedented moves to help spread the DTV message:

An Extensive Nationwide Initiative for DTV Outreach

DTV Speakers Bureau

However, these new efforts will have to get the facts right on the issue of cable TV users that do not have set top boxes, a category that probably includes a lot of elderly Americans who don't watch MTV and use basic cable service.
===========

Response on NCTA blog

2008-08-11T18:44:00.006-04:00

HD Radio: Followup

Several months ago I wrote about how HD Radio was missing from the FCC website and speculated that was a factor in the negligible adoption rate of this new technology. Now I see that FCC should generally be neutral on technologies, but it would be nice if they made information available to the public on new communications services that have been authorized.

I visited relatives in Arizona recently and stopped by Fry's Electronics, my favorite electronics store. For those east of the Mississippi , Fry's is the offshoot of a grocery store of the same name that has Walmart-sized stores full of electronics, home appliances, and the junk food that appeals to techno nerds. Their farthest east store is in Texas, a long way from the Beltway.

I heard about HD Radio while living in France. Since I threw away my ancient clock radio when I moved to Europe in 2004, I thought I would buy an HD Radio clock radio when I got back in 2007. Imagine my surprise to find out that such units were very hard to find and cost over $200! So I bought an AM/FM clock radio at Target for about $20. But I have been looking for HD Radio in stores on a low priority basis ever since.

Well, Fry's is the first store I have ever visited with 2 different models, one of which was actually under $200! So NAB may be rejoicing in this support for over the air broadcasting. However, the broadcasters pressured FCC to force XM and Sirius to include HD Radio technology in future XM/Sirius receivers and failed:

Although we find it unnecessary to impose a condition requiring the inclusion of chips for digital audio broadcast (“DAB”) or HD RadioTM in SDARS [e.g. XM & Sirius] receivers,we believe that important have been raised about DAB that warrant further examination in a separate proceeding. As discussed in Section VI.B.4, the Commission commits to initiating a notice of inquiry within 30 days after adoption of this Order to gather additional information on the issue.(Para. 7)

...

Though we are unpersuaded a case has been presented on this record of a merger-specific harm to HD Radio not remedied by the voluntary commitments and other conditions, we do believe important questions have been raised that warrant further examination in a separate proceeding. To this end, the Commission commits to initiating a notice of inquiry within 30 days from the adoption date of this Order to gather more information onissues including, but not limited to:

-Whether HD Radio chips or any other audio technology should be included in all satellite radio receivers;

-Whether satellite radio capability or any other audio technology should be included in all HD Radio receivers;

-The cost to auto manufacturersof including HD Radio chips;

-The cost to radio manufacturers of including HD Radio chips;

-Consumer demand for HD radio;

-The amount and type of programming available on HD Radio today, and that projected to be available over the next 3 years; and

-Whether the FCC has jurisdiction to mandate inclusion of HD Radio, satellite radio, or other audio technology. (Para. 130)"

So, fear not, FCC now at least uses the phrase "HD Radio" and plans to meddle in the issue of why consumers are buying it. Does FCC have such jurisdiction? I doubt it.

However, another observation I made in Fry's probably is relevant: Fry's had 4 models of "Internet radios" in contrast with only 2 HR Radio models. The Internet radios are selfstanding units that use a Wi-Fi connection to connect to the net and a radio-like interface to access mp3 streams.

So consumers want Internet radios, not HD Radios. What should FCC do?

In the early 1980s there was a major dispute over AM stereo. Many accused FCC of denying this "breakthrough" service to the public through hesitation over picking one standard. Few want to observe that AM stereo never was successful in other countries that decisively picked a standard. Perhaps both AM stereo and HD Radio are technologies looking for customers. Pushing DTV was useful because it made channels 51-69 available for something more useful than over-the-air TV - watched by a shrinking minority of households. Pushing HD Radio, already rejected by consumers, probably should be a low priority. Why doesn't FCC do more to encourage new technology that give the marketplace more choices?
=========
8/25/08 Update

The FCC has now released the promised NOI, calling it "Notice of Inquiry Regarding Development of Devices Capable of Supporting Multiple Audio Entertainment Services." Like me, apparently FCC isn't sure whether it has this jurisdiction either:

"We seek comment on whether the Commission has the jurisdiction to mandate the inclusion of HD Radio, SDARS, or any other audio technology in receivers. Do we have express or ancillary statutory authority to require receiver manufacturers to include certain technology in receivers?" (Para. 21)

Another odd jurisdictional issue asked in the NOI,

"Should the Commission require reduced royalty fees to iBiquity if we mandate the inclusion of an HD Radio chip? If so, does the Commission have the authority to do so?" (Para. 8)

While having no formal legal qualifications, I am positive FCC lacks jurisdiction in both areas.

Just because we techies can build some new technology like HD Radio, consumers voting with their dollars may well decide not be buy it. This is what happened with AM stereo worldwide. If iBiquity wants to sell more radios, let them lower their license fees. That's how market's work, not through government regulation. (Sounds Republican doesn't it?)

2008-08-05T16:52:00.006-04:00

FCC Now Exceeds Minimum
Legal Requirements for
"Sunshine"

While the current FCC has been criticized often for its failings in transparency, a Public Notice yesterday shows that it is now implementing Chmn. Martin's promise to exceed the requirements of the Carter-era Government in Sunshine Act.

Rather than just announce the agenda of open meetings at the one week minimum which is when most communications with the outside on agenda items is cut off, now everyone - not just well connected lobbyists - is getting several week' notice.

My congratulations on this positive movement and hope that there will be more moves in this direction.

SpectrumTalk

The Theory, Practice, Politics and Problems of Spectrum Reform: A U.K. Regulator's Perspective

The Theory, Practice, Politics and Problems
of Spectrum Reform: A U.K. Regulator's Perspective