Aviation officials and regulators raised concerns Wed. that FCC rules could allow ultrawideband (UWB) devices to hamper critical avionics systems before potential interference was fully evaluated. FCC order in Feb. set what agency called “ultraconservative” emission limits for UWB. Based on concerns UWB could interfere with safety-of-life and other critical aviation systems, FAA began testing devices last week at its Technical Center in Atlantic City (CD Nov 18 p5). But Sally Frodge of Transportation Dept.’s Office of the Secy., also said at World Airline Entertainment Assn. (WAEA) conference in Washington that continuing resolution that expires in Jan. could tie up funding needed for follow- on evaluation of those test results.

Airline officials and technology developers urged federal regulators Tues. to back certification guidelines for how wireless devices could be used aboard aircraft without causing interference. FAA’s John Dimtroff said at World Airline Entertainment Assn. (WAEA) conference in Washington Tues. that proposal was pending to set up special advisory committee on safety of personal electronics devices on aircraft and possible testing standards. Because of funding considerations, FAA would have ultimate sign-off on such decision, but it is one that has backing of U.S. airlines and technology developers such as Intel.

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) began testing ultra-wideband (UWB) devices last week in effort to make initial assessment by year-end on potential impact of new technology on avionics systems. FAA, along with Depts. of Transportation, Defense and NASA, is among agencies that expressed concerns about potential interference of UWB in safety-of-life frequencies. “We do anticipate that there will be some problems based on what we know about UWB types of devices,” FAA Program Mgr. George Sakai said: “To what degree, we don’t know. This is why we needed to do some actual testing.”

Dynamics of the FCC are likely to change now that Jonathan Adelstein was confirmed by the Senate late Thurs. for the open Democratic seat on the Commission, sources tell us. Those who know Adelstein were reluctant to predict direction the FCC would take now that it once again had full complement of 5 members. Many expect Adelstein usually to vote with Comr. Copps, Commission’s other Democrat. But others said he would think independently and wouldn’t necessarily follow form on every issue. Even rural advocates said Adelstein, touted for his concerns of rural issues, could break from rural lobby on some issues.

Advocates for minority and low-income groups are researching ways to challenge alleged electronic redlining by cable and telecom operators when they roll out new advanced services such as high-speed Internet in low-income and minority neighborhoods, sources said. Minority Media & Telecom Council (MMTC) will take up issue at March board meeting and will decide whether to mount FCC or court challenge, Exec. Dir. David Honig told us. Civil Rights Forum on Communications Policy (CRFCP) said it was actively seeking ways to raise $25,000-$35,000 to conduct study of electronic redlining in Boston, D.C., N.Y.

FCC granted conditional approval for $47.5 billion merger of AT&T and Comcast, nation’s first- and 3rd-largest cable companies. Merged company would have 27.02 million subscribers -- 28.9% of all U.S. multichannel video programming distributor (MVPD) customers in 41 states. However, public interest groups immediately said they would take decision to court.

FCC proposed service rules on licensing and use of 5.9 GHz band for dedicated short-range communications (DSRC) services in intelligent transportation system (ITS), it said in text of item adopted Nov. 7 (CD Nov 8 p9). In text released Fri., FCC proposed to permit entities providing public safety DSRC operations to use 5.9 GHz band. It also proposed to apply application, licensing and processing rules under part 90 of Commission’s rules for public safety entities. FCC also proposed to apply competitive bidding procedures under Commission’s Part 1 competitive bidding rules in case it allowed non-public safety radio applications in 5.9 GHz band and in case licensing scheme it selected for those ITS applications resulted in mutually exclusive licenses. FCC also requested comments on issues raised by 2 petitions for reconsideration or clarification of allocation order. Commission said it dismissed petitions from PanAmSat, which was seeking reconsideration of FCC’s decision that prior coordination between DSRC operations applications and fixed satellite service (FSC) uplinks was unnecessary, and from Mark IV Industries seeking reconsideration or clarification of power levels and emission mask requirements established in allocation order. Comments are due 60 days after Federal Register publication, replies 90 days.

After 2 previous failed attempts at instituting EEO rules for broadcasters, cable and satellite companies, FCC adopted new set of rules Thurs. that it believes will hold up in court this time. That’s because new rules are basically carbon copy of part of its previous rules that U.S. Appeals Court, D.C., found acceptable last time around. Commission left out part of its old rules that court overturned on constitutional grounds.

In next step toward carving out more 3G spectrum, FCC Thurs. approved spectrum allocation order and proposed service rules for 2 blocks of 45 MHz of contiguous spectrum. Allocation means 5 MHz of Multipoint Distribution Service (MDS) spectrum, which is itself connected to other proceedings, and incumbent point-to-point microwave licensees will have to relocate. FCC officials said order, which appeared to contain no surprises, didn’t make any decisions on potential relocation spectrum for MDS, but said it would be taken up in future proceeding.

Bell companies’ claims that open-access regulations are eliminating incentives to upgrade their networks are “misleading and unsubstantiated,” CompTel Pres. Russell Frisby said in letter to FCC. Letter said RBOCs are attempting to “extort relaxed regulation in return for the promise of broadband deployment” but “in reality, the RBOCs have a long track record of breaking promises to deploy broadband infrastructure in return for regulatory concessions.” Bell companies want reduction of unbundled network elements (UNEs) and changes in total element long run incremental cost (TELRIC)-based pricing, letter said. “RBOCs reneged on promises to deploy broadband facilities long before the Federal Communications Commission implemented rules that enabled competitors to use the incumbents existing infrastructure,” letter said. Examples included: (1) 1995 promise Ameritech Indiana (now SBC) made to Ind. Utility Regulatory Commission (IURC) in exchange for dropping certain aspects of jurisdictional oversight. Ameritech Indiana promised to spend more than $120 million on infrastructure improvements for schools, hospitals and major govt. centers. But 1999 IURC report said SBC had invested only $18 million in infrastructure improvements, well short of the $80 million it had promised at that time. Report also said SBC counted infrastructure provided to customers that were not schools, hospitals or major govt. centers toward its plan. (2) In 1993, Bell Atlantic Pa. (now Verizon) used Pa. public utility code provision to promise universal bandwidth of at least 45 Mbps in exchange for alternative regulation. In 2000, Verizon said it would meet promise by deploying DSL throughout Pa. DSL can only achieve speeds of 1.5 Mbps, slower than 45 Mbps speed Verizon promised, letter said. Pa. PUC expressed concerns that Verizon wouldn’t meet goal of deployment to 50% of rural customers by 2004 and that residential DSL deployment lagged behind deployment to business customers. Letter said FCC line-sharing order dramatically increased broadband deployment. “Without line sharing, there would be no competition in this market,” letter said.