UTC Seeks Stay on 6 GHz OKs; Likely Faces Uphill Climb
The Utilities Technology Council and other utility, public safety and infrastructure groups asked the FCC to stop certifying low-power indoor (LPI) devices in the 6 GHz band because of the alleged interference risk, in a petition posted Wednesday in docket 18-295. The groups filed a separate petition seeking a rulemaking to develop revised rules for the band. Industry officials said the FCC is unlikely to retreat from last year’s 5-0 order allocating 1,200 MHz for sharing with Wi-Fi and other unlicensed use in the band (see 2004230059). Another wild card is a challenge to the rules at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, where the FCC faced tough questions in September oral argument (see 2109170057).
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.
Among those signing petitions were APCO, the International Association of Fire Chiefs, the National Public Safety Telecommunications Council, Association of American Railroads, Edison Electric Institute, Nuclear Energy Institute and American Gas Association. The FCC declined comment.
“Setting aside deployment in 6 GHz while the wireless ecosystem has been rocked by the C-band controversy, the sidelining of 3.1-3.45 GHz for at least two years of study and no start date for a 2.5 GHz auction could further impair our evolution to next-gen technologies,” Cooley’s Robert McDowell told us. “We have a voracious appetite for mid-band spectrum, so regulators should tread cautiously before taking more mid-band off of the table, regardless of whether it is licensed or unlicensed.”
"Use of 6 GHz for unlicensed service, including LPI, is in the process of making transformational changes to communications capabilities, and I don’t see any way the Commission (or courts) would entertain the petition to essentially reverse its prior extensive and cautious review of the interference,” emailed former Commissioner Mike O’Rielly, who voted for the order. “Every ‘loser’ in past spectrum fights seemingly wants to wastefully relitigate the same issues hoping to get a new ear when none should be provided.”
“The stay is necessary to prevent the imminent risk of irreparable harm from the interference that these unlicensed 6 GHz LPI devices are certain to cause to incumbent licensed systems in the band,” the petition said. “Recent real-world interference tests have revealed that beacon signals by 6 GHz LPI devices will be constantly transmitting and will cause interference to licensed microwave systems.” The tests show “even a single 6 GHz LPI device will cause harmful interference to a licensed microwave system from distances of 4.5 kilometers away,” the petition said: “Given that the Commission has already authorized 6 GHz LPI devices, an immediate stay is necessary to prevent these devices from causing harmful interference to licensed microwave systems.”
A second petition urged the FCC to “exercise its rulemaking authority to revise the rules and conduct open and transparent testing to prove these rules effectively prevent interference to licensed microwave systems.” All LPI devices should have to use automated frequency control or “some other interference protection mechanism to prevent interference,” it said. It seeks “a mechanism for cost recovery by incumbents to reimburse them for mitigating and resolving interference from unlicensed 6 GHz operations.”
The interference threat “from these devices is imminent and substantial, and the Commission must stop certifying 6 GHz LPI devices and revoke the certification of those devices it has already approved,” UTC said Wednesday: “The Commission should also conduct independent tests to determine if it is necessary to develop new rules for unlicensed standard power access devices.” The group expects “swift action” by the FCC.
“It is regrettable that when America’s need for Wi-Fi connectivity is greater than ever, the petitioners seek to halt it while relying on flawed studies and repeating unsubstantiated assertions,” said Alex Roytblat, Wi-Fi Alliance vice president-regulatory affairs. The 6 GHz decision is “further validated by the fact that, this year alone, over 50 countries around the world opened the 6 GHz band to Wi-Fi while adopting similar regulatory framework for protection of microwave links,” he told us.
“The Wi-Fi industry and business users have invested enormously in 6E,” the version of Wi-Fi 6 using the band, said Public Knowledge Senior Vice President Harold Feld. “To pull back now for an indefinite time to change the rules, essentially destroying all the time and money invested over the last 18 months, is a drastic remedy,” he said: “It takes more than just a rehash of already rejected engineering studies to get the FCC to reverse course at the last minute.”
Utilities are improperly seeking reconsideration of last year’s order, said Michael Calabrese, director of the Wireless Future Program at New America. “Utilities and other incumbents filed reams of engineering data and testing in the record of the proceeding that is now long over,” he said: “In response the commission adopted what we believe is an unnecessarily low power limit on indoor use that will already shrink the potential consumer benefits of 5G-quality Wi-Fi indoors. Utility links also incorporate a huge extra margin of safety against interference that results from unusual weather conditions.”