UWB ATTENTION TURNS TO HOW GOVT. OPERATORS ARE TO BE TREATED

Asked whether federal agencies would be authorized to operate UWB devices that exceeded Part 15 limits, NTIA said in written response to questions from Communications Daily that use by federal agencies of commercially developed UWB systems typically would be approved if equipment satisfied Part 15 limits. In other words, agencies would have no restrictions from operating commercial equipment that already passed Part 15 muster. “However, under the restrictions presently contained in Chapter 10 of the NTIA manual or possibly under future similar or modified restrictions, federal operations of UWB systems will be reviewed on a case- by-case basis,” NTIA said.

Chapter 10 of NTIA manual of regulations and procedures outlines federal govt. use, “on a case-by-case, coordinated basis,” of UWB radars. NTIA response said those regulations and so-called Annex K of its manual, which covers similar regulations for unlicensed devices as FCC’s Part 15 rules, hadn’t been updated to reflect recent FCC action on UWB. “These procedures predate by several years the current UWB proceeding,” NTIA said. Agency’s response said those procedures included provisions for “eventual FCC type acceptance” and required submission of “rigorous” proof of compatibility with existing devices and site by site coordination. NTIA already has authorized experimental use of UWB-based ground penetrating radar (GPR) systems for public safety and highway inspection uses and operational use of GPR for Justice and Energy departments on coordinated basis.

“NTIA will consider changes and additions to its regulations when the FCC rulemaking is complete on UWB,” NTIA said. Annex K authorizes federal agencies to use devices similar to those allowed by FCC under Part 15 rules for unlicensed devices. NTIA said it had “generally incorporated” FCC rules on equipment standards for commercial equipment “when applicable to similar government equipment.” Agency said it hadn’t followed suit on Part 15 provisions when they covered devices not used by govt. or were used differently by federal agencies: “NTIA will use the FCC’s rules for UWB systems that may be used by federal government agencies where applicable.”

Issue of current govt. use of UWB devices emerged in months leading up to FCC approval of Part 15 changes for that technology. On one hand, FAA and some in Defense Dept. had raised serious concerns about potential for UWB emissions in govt. bands to interfere with GPS and other safety-of-life and avionics systems (CD Sept 10 p1). Some in federal agencies who had raised concerns before FCC vote last month on UWB remained worried that final emissions limits didn’t go far enough to protect systems such as GPS. Some panelists at UWB conference last week sponsored by Va. Center for Innovative Technology expressed concern whether restrictions on UWB would be enough to protect GPS and other systems.

At same time, dozens of federal programs already are using technology, many of them military users. “What is ironic is that the military has been one of the bigger users of UWB technologies and I think the idea has been this is great stuff, why do we want other people to use it, especially because it’s great for encryption and it tells you if somebody is a friend or foe,” said telecom consultant Greg Simon, who has done work on UWB for Time Domain.

“People are watching it from all different sides,” industry source said. If FCC order ultimately were to contain language requiring federal users to abide by same power limit restrictions in commercial band as commercial operators must meet in govt. bands, that could be challenge for UWB developers, source said. “A way to get everyone familiar with this is to have lots of government systems operating,” source said, saying that how that played out wouldn’t be clear until order itself was released.

One congressional staffer said it was clear FCC had authority to set restrictions on govt. UWB operations that created radio frequency emissions in commercial bands. One “irony” of UWB proceedings is that some military operations that use UWB have been operating at power limits that exceed Part 15, aide said. “There is ample precedent for the FCC creating rules governing emissions into restricted bands,” aide said. “Certainly” Commission has jurisdiction, based on Communications Act and NTIA authorization legislation, to regulate govt. operations that produce emissions into commercial bands, staffer said. Questions raised about need to look at bifurcated spectrum management are being talked about in both House and Senate committees, aide said.

However, industry source said his reading of Sec. 302a of Communications Act, which allows FCC to make rules that are now under Part 15, is that such Commission policy couldn’t extend to systems used by govt. “My gut is that the federal government user is not bound by the Commission’s rules,” another source said.

How govt. users of UWB are treated under policy changes speaks directly to thorny issue of how lines of authority for commercial and govt. spectrum are drawn between FCC and NTIA. “Because of the separation of powers between the 3 branches of government, there is very little that one can do to force another branch of government” in that area, said Robert Fontana, pres. of Multispectral Solutions, UWB developer that has customer base of mostly military govt. users: “The FCC has a voice in what can happen governmentwide. It’s only a voice.” While some have pointed out that govt. use of UWB far exceeds in some cases limits set by upcoming UWB order, Fontana said there was no comparison between military and commercial use. “If the Navy decides to use [UWB] on a ship for some reason, the potential for it interfering with something else is very, very small,” he said: “The Navy has to go through procedures internally to make sure it doesn’t interfere with something somewhere else.” He also said Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee (IRAC) coordinated approval for spectrum systems used by federal agencies, which must receive NTIA certification before submitting radio frequency authorization request to IRAC’s frequency assignment subcommittee.

“If we start selling tens of millions of [commercial] devices put out on an unlicensed basis, the potential for interference is significant compared to what the government would have problems with,” Fontana said. He said there was “order of magnitude difference” between scale on which govt. used such devices, which might number 100 systems throughout particular country, compared to commercial devices, of which there could be 1,000 or more in square mile, he said.