The FCC Wireless Bureau sought comment on an...
The FCC Wireless Bureau sought comment on an AT&T petition asking for a waiver of commission rules for a test in south Florida of power spectral density (PSD) as an alternative to effective radiated power for determining base station power…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
limits. AT&T requested the waiver in July (http://bit.ly/154X4It). AT&T proposes a PSD limit of 250 watts/MHz in non-rural areas and 500 watts/MHz in rural areas and offered a study it says shows that shifting to PSD-based power limits for the cellular service in the markets wouldn’t cause harmful interference. “Offering cellular carriers the option to use a PSD measure for calculating cellular base station power limits would eliminate unintended penalties on the deployment of advanced digital broadband modulation schemes such as Long Term Evolution ... in the cellular bands,” AT&T said in the petition. “Grant of the requested relief would be in the public interest because: (i) the waiver would remove disparities between radio services that limit cellular carriers’ ability to deploy the most efficient and advanced modulation techniques; and (ii) the waiver would promote the deployment of mobile broadband services consistent with the policy goals enumerated in the National Broadband Plan.” AT&T said the bureau sought comment last year on its earlier petition for expedited rulemaking raising the same issue. “No carrier commenting on AT&T’s proposed rule change opposed the proposed revision to the power limits rule,” AT&T said. “Verizon Wireless, while agreeing with AT&T’s proposal, argued that even higher PSD limits should be adopted by the Commission.” Comments are due Sept. 23, replies Oct. 8 (http://bit.ly/16nLl16).