Harold Feld and I Usually Agree on Spectrum Issues

But He Is Wrong on the Prison Jamming Issue

Harold Feld is legal director of Public Knowledge. Until 2009, he was Senior Vice President of the Media Access Project (MAP), a non-profit, public interest telecommunications law firm that promotes the public's First Amendment right to hear and be heard on the electronic media of today and tomorrow. He often represents a variety of liberal groups dealing with spectrum and media access issues, including New America Foundation - a long time client. We usually agree on all spectrum issues. Readers may recall that his video's have appeared - and will continue to appear - in the "YouTube FCC Film Festival" corner of this blog

But recently Harold posted an entry on his blog and coauthored a letter to Congress on the prison cell phone jamming issue. The blog post is entitled "CellAntenna Scam Continues To Gain Momentum — Bummer" (CellAntenna is a manufacturer of cell phone jammers - illegal at present - and a vocal proponent for their use).

Let me say that I have no connection at all with CellAntenna other than having spoken to one of their employees once over the phone. I am working with the South Carolina Department of Corrections on seeking FCC approval of jamming in prisons under conditions that would prevent interference to others. (For those who say jamming is illegal under the 1934 Act, read the petition to see why the FCC has the authority to allow jamming.)

Is CellAntenna involved in a scam? Their apparent ongoing sale of illegal equipment, if verified, would indicate questionable morals. Some of their technical claims seem questionable. Since cell phone jamming is illegal at present, legitimate firms are not active in the area. I believe that legalization with firm and strict rules will clean up the scene and questionable behavior. Of course, FCC enforcement will be needed - something that has been scarce in the recent history.

But the real issue here is CTIA's repeated allegation that prison jamming would inevitably cause "unintended consequences" which is just as unjustified as much as some of CellAntenna's claim. However, I do fully agree that poorly implemented jamming is very dangerous.

Read the South Carolina petition that has now been signed by 28 states for a detailed discussion of the problem and a proposed solution that tries to balance all competing interests. It would not allow jammer sales in Radio Shack. It would draw a clear bright line between prison jamming and jamming in schools, restaurants, and theaters where cell phone use is merely obnoxious not dangerous. (Why doesn't CTIA ever do anything to discourage such obnoxious cellphone use?)

Harold and others place much credence is a comment made in a Wired magazine article

"There are also technical shortcomings: A few layers of tinfoil can shield a phone from the jamming signal."

I am not saying that this is impossible under all circumstances, but theory tells us that it is probably something that will only work on rare occasions and that the geometry of the "tinfoil" will have to change as objects in the area move and change the RF field at the cell phone in question.

The letter to Congress states,

"Cell phone providers can already adjust cell phone networks so that only authorized handsets can connect to the network. This practice, known as 'white listing,' will prevent any contraband phone from functioning without causing any interference to wireless systems. "

CTIA's Steve Largent made the same point at the Senate hearing this week. I haven't heard any proposals about how this will be financed and when CTIA members will offer it to at least prisons with large buffer areas around them.

Prison jamming is not a panacea. It will not solve all cell phone prison problems. It is not even possible in some prisons due to their size and location. But the cell phone use in prison problem is a major issue endangering public safety. Until better solutions are developed, given the real budgets of prisons, jamming will be a useful tool where it can be safely used.

Ruth Milkman ==> WTB

Chairman Genachowski's wireless team is coming into place now with the following announcement today:

Today, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski announced four members of the senior leadership of the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, who will join the other senior staff in WTB. The announcement includes: Bureau Chief Ruth Milkman, Senior Deputy Chief James Schlichting, Deputy Chief Renee Roland Crittendon, and Deputy Chief John S. Leibovitz.

“This bureau will play a pivotal role in promoting innovation, competition, job creation and investment in the wireless sector,” said Chairman Genachowski. “I am delighted to have a Wireless Telecommunications Bureau team with the expertise to help seize the opportunity for the United States to lead the world in mobile communications.”

Chief, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Ruth Milkman: Ms. Milkman is currently Special Counsel, leading the transition effort in the Chairman’s office. Ms. Milkman served at the Commission between 1986 and 1998 in a variety of positions, including Deputy Chief of the International and Common Carrier Bureaus, and Senior Legal Advisor to Chairman Reed Hundt, with responsibilityfor wireless issues and spectrum policy. Ms. Milkman also was a partner at Lawler, Metzger, Milkman & Keeney, LLC in Washington, D.C. She began her legal career as a law clerk to the Honorable J. Harvie Wilkinson of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.

Senior Deputy Chief, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, James Schlichting: Mr. Schlichting has been at the FCC for nearly 24 years, most recently as Deputy Chief and Acting Chief of WTB, and previously as Deputy Chief of the Office of Engineering and Technology, Deputy Chief of the Common Carrier Bureau, Chief of the Pricing Policy Division in the Common Carrier Bureau, and Chief of the Policy and Program Planning Division of the Common Carrier Bureau. Prior to joining the FCC, Mr. Schlichting practiced communications law at Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering. He began his legal career as a law clerk to the Honorable Luther M. Swygert and Philip W. Tone of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

Deputy Chief, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Renee Roland Crittendon: Ms. Crittendon has been at the FCC for eight years. She most recently served as Chief of Staff and Senior Legal Advisor in the Office of Commissioner Jonathan S. Adelstein where she was responsible for spectrum, broadband, international and public safety issues. Before joining the Commissioner’s office in 2007, Ms. Crittendon served as Deputy Bureau Chief in the Wireline Competition Bureau. Prior to that, she was Chief of the Wireline Bureau’s Competition Policy Division. Ms. Crittendon also served as Associate Division Chief of the MobilitDivision of the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau. Before joining the Commission, Ms. Crittendon served as Deputy Chief Counsel –Telecommunications for Prism Communication Services, Inc, and was in private practice with a Washington, D.C. law firm specializing in media, wireline and satellite issues.

Deputy Chief, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, John S. Leibovitz: Mr. Leibovitz was a staff member on the Presidential Transition Team, where he helped to coordinate the Technology, Innovation, and Government Reform working group. Prior to the transition, Mr. Leibovitz worked as an entrepreneur and strategy consultant in the telecommunications industry, with an emphasis on the wireless sector. He started his business career with McKinsey& Company, in New York. He has written about technology and communications policy in the Yale Law Journal and the Yale Journal of Law and Technology.

Another interesting appointment is

Managing Director, Steven VanRoekel: Mr. VanRoekel has over 18 years of Information Technology and management experience and was most recently a top executive in the Windows Server and Tools division at Microsoft Corporation. Mr. VanRoekel held various positions in his 15 years at Microsoft, including managing Microsoft’s cross-industryWeb Services team and serving as Speech and StrategyAssistant to Bill Gates. Mr. VanRoekel alsoassisted Mr. Gates in his transition from CEO of Microsoft to Chief Software Architect and advised the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation on its shift in giving philosophyfrom a focus on technologyto a focus on world health. While at Microsoft, Mr. VanRoekel was awarded numerous honors for management and marketing excellence, including Microsoft’s Redmond Manager of the Year, and consumer marketing awards, including “Best in Show” at the Consumer Electronics Show for the use of innovative marketing and new media.

The Office of the Managing Director has been a backwater of incompetence that has badly affected the whole FCC for years. It essentially has no policy responsibility but provides the infrastructures for the FCC. Thus it manages the website and the internal computer network such as the ECFS system we use for filing and reviewing comments. It is responsible for personnel issues and has hindered effective recruiting of engineers for years. I hope Mr. Van Roekel, having come from the real world, can clean up this mess.

How About a Spectrum Policy Backlog Inventory?

There is a lot of talk about legislation to mandate a "spectrum inventory" by FCC and NTIA to help liberate more spectrum for immediate use. But why not first inventory all the non-DTV Title III policy proceedings that have been gathering dust in 12th St., SW due first to the previous chairman's disinterest in spectrum policy and more recently to the interregnum and the focus on DTV transition? Some examples are AWS-3, removing wireless mics from the 700 MHz band that was auctioned to others, finding a long term home for the presently illegal nonbroadcast wireless mics, TV whitespace reconsideration, etc.

There are lots of agenda items in this backlog. My suggestion to the new team is to count them all up, make a schedule for eliminating the backlog, and post online a tracking systems that shows how many items are acted on as a function of time.

State Correctional Systems Unite,
Ask To Jam Cell Phone Signals

[From SCDC press release today]
Twenty-five other states, the Philadelphia Prison System and D.C. Department of Corrections have signed a S.C. Department of Corrections’ petition that asks the Federal Communications Commission for permission to jam cell phone signals in prisons. [UPDATE: with the addition of Texas, now 26 states.]

The petition was drafted with assistance from Michael Marcus, former associate chief for technology at the FCC, and was submitted today. It explains in technical terms how jamming can be carried out in prisons without interfering with any cell phone signals off of prison property.

The S.C. Department of Corrections hosted a successful demonstration of cell phone jamming technology in November, where members of the media and corrections professionals from around the country saw that surgical jamming technology works: phones inside a prison facility were rendered useless with no interference to phones outside of the facility or to law enforcement radios.

Unfortunately, FCC regulators refused to attend and have yet to even respond to the agency’s request to continue using it.

Jamming cell phone signals is outlawed by present FCC Rules. Already federal law enforcement agencies are exempt from the act’s prohibition.

Prisons, jails and detention centers need the same latitude. Incarcerated convicts are using smuggled cell phones to threaten and kill witnesses, deal drugs and continue other criminal enterprises from behind bars. While cell phone detection devices and search dogs are helpful, they are more expensive and less effective than jamming, they require too much manpower, and cover too little ground to effectively stop inmates in large prisons from using cell phones.

Critics of cell phone jamming in the wireless industry have said they want to work with prison officials to solve the problem. This petition addresses the industry’s concerns with signal interference outside prisons and includes mechanisms to measure and prevent signal disruption.

“Prison systems from every corner of this country, from Georgia to New York to California to South Dakota, have signed this petition,” S.C. Corrections Director Jon Ozmint said. “These are the people who understand prison best and who realize just how dangerous it is for an inmate to possess a cell phone. We hope that the FCC will take appropriate action to allow prisons to jam cell phones. But, if not we expect that Congress will eventually take such action. We only hope that they will do so before more innocent lives are lost.”

========

The petition includes the following proposals to prevent "unintended consequences" that would impact other users:

• Jamming should be subject to a license with strict eligibility requirements which require approval of a coordinator who verifies eligibility, coordinates with nearby CMRS licensees, and reviews the technical details of the proposed installation.

• Jamming must result in no harmful interference on any CMRS users outside the property of correctional facilities. Thus, there will be no impact on E-9-1-1 systems.

• Jamming must result in no harmful interference on any legal non-CMRS spectrum user anywhere - licensed or unlicensed.

• Strict technical standards and equipment authorization procedures should be implemented for all jamming equipment.

• The sale of jamming equipment must be strictly controlled and limited to state and local governments with direct shipment of equipment from the manufacturer/importer to the FCC licensed correctional facility where it is to be used.

• Equipment must be permanently labeled with a warning of criminal penalties if used without a license and a requirement to return to manufacturer/importer for destruction.

• Eligibility requirements should be strict and preclude any "slippery slope" expansion. The cornerstone of Petitioners' proposed eligibility requirement is that the licensee must show that possession and use of cell phones within the area covered by jamming is illegal under state and/or local law. This distinction clearly differentiates correctional facilities from other locations where owners and managers might wish to block CMRS communications for various reasons.

Press coverage:
SC The State
AP
Wireless Week
Wired

Senate Committee on Commerce, Science & Transportation hearing 7/15/09
(Includes video of hearing)

Spectrum Inventory Bill Moving Through Congress

BroadbandCensus.com reports that The Senate Commerce Committee on Wednesday approved S. 649, the Radio Spectrum Inventory Act, which would give the NTIA and FCC 180 days to present Congress with a complete inventory of the radio frequencies that they manage from 300 Megahertz to 3.5 Gigahertz.

The key provision of the bill is a new Section 342 of the Communications Act that would read:

(a) Radio Spectrum Inventory- Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this section, and biennially thereafter, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration and the Federal Communications Commission, in consultation with the Office of Science and Technology, shall carry out each of the following activities:

(1) Conduct a report that includes an inventory of each radio spectrum band, from 300 Megahertz to 3.5 Gigahertz, managed by each such agency. Such report shall include--

(A) the licenses or government user assigned in the band;

(B) the total spectrum allocation, by band, of each licensee or government user (in percentage terms and in sum);

(C) the number of intentional radiators and end-user intentional radiators that have been deployed in the band with each license or government user; and

(D) if such information is available--

(i) the type of intentional radiators operating in the band;

(ii) the type of unlicensed intentional radiators authorized to operate in the band;

(iii) contour maps that illustrate signal coverage and strength; and

(iv) the approximate geo-location of base stations or fixed transmitters.

CTIA immediately applauded this event. Not surprising since the Center for Responsive Politics reports that the following organizations are formally lobbying for this bill:

Cellular Telecom & Internet Assn
National Amusements Inc
Verizon Communications
Wireless Broadband Coalition
National Cable & Telecommunications Assn
Technology Assn of America
Alcatel-Lucent
AT&T Inc
Broadwing Inc
Consumer Electronics Assn
Entergy Corp
Lockheed Martin
MetroPCS Communications

I believe that more information on spectrum use is a long needed idea. My former FCC colleague, Paul Kolodzy, used to say during the Spectrum Policy Task Force/SPTF deliberations that the US spends more counting agricultural production like corn and cattle than spectrum even though spectrum continues more to the GDP.

But let us look at the current bill and what it proposes to be accomplished in 6 months. For the FCC, (a)(1)(A) and (a)(1)(B) are already done and have been for decades. (a)(1)(C) involves information that is not presently available at FCC on end user equipment. How many mobiles units does police department x or taxi company y have? Note that to make the job of the CTIA membership easier, they no longer even report cell site information to FCC. So at FCC (a)(1)(C) will require a massive new data collection, often involving small businesses which hold radio licenses. Then we have radios that are "licensed by rule" such as boat and aircraft radios on noncommercial units. FCC doesn't even know who these "licensees" are, so counting them will be a real challenge. (Should we mention the wireless mic issue at UHF where 90% of the users are unlicensed and illegal under present rules?)

Now in the case of NTIA much of the information is available in classified databases. The bill tries to deal with this in (b):

(b) National Security Exemption- A licensee or government user of spectrum may petition the Commission or the National Telecommunications and Information Administration for a partial or total exemption from inclusion on the website and in the report required by subsection (a). Such an exemption may be granted only to the extent that each such agency determines that disclosure of such information would be harmful to the national security of the United States. The licensee or government user seeking an exemption under this subsection bears the burden of justifying the exemption and shall provide clear and convincing evidence to support such an exemption. Any such exemption shall apply only for 2 years and shall expire upon the end of such 2-year period unless the licensee or government user seeks and obtains an extension in accordance with this subsection. Any information that is excluded from public disclosure pursuant to this subsection shall still be compiled and reported to the Committees of Congress described in subsection (a)(4) on a confidential basis.

Those of us use to how things work can images a huge paper pushing exercise at NTIA on how much could be declassified. Considering this problem has built up over decades, it is unlikely it will be resolved in 6 months.

But what happens when the inventory is finished? Presumably CTIA and friends want to hunt for new spectrum to use for their industry. Fine enough. When can the spectrum be used? Presumably when it doesn't cause "harmful interference" to other users? What is "harmful interference"?

CTIA and mainstream spectrum players such as broadcasters have consistently fought against FCC trying to elaborate on the current ambiguous definition of harmful interference. As "haves" and insiders the current ambiguities give them an upper hand where each issue is resolved in intensive 8th Floor lobbying. They do not want transparency.

Another topic opposed by mainstream spectrum users is receiver standards. (Note that in this context, "standards" need not mean regulation but could mean minimum performance before one is entitled to protection.) Although it is not obvious to newcomers, it is well known in the spectrum field that "most spectrum is used by receivers not transmitters". So if and when the "inventory" is finished, we will all get into a new set of massive arguments about whether a proposed new spectrum use will cause "harmful interference" to some population of receivers that has some unknown immunity to nearby signals, adjacent channel signals, signals capable of causing receiver-generated intermodulation, etc.

Finally, in the case of NTIA-controlled (Federal) Government spectrum, how do you decide if some could be used for new private uses? NTIA control is more nominal than real since in reality the NTIA management can not order more power agencies to spend their own money. This is the natural consequence of the moves by Presidents Nixon and Carter to move the Section 305 power of the President out of the White House to the Commerce Department and create NTIA. The present NTIA structure is just not up to the job.

Congressionally mandated reallocations, e.g. 47 USC 923, could be tried again, but they have long term costs in creating a more hostile atmosphere between FCC and the IRAC members who really control most of the spectrum management decisions in the federal government. I believe that these previous actions poisoned the atmosphere and made NTIA/IRAC drag heir feet on other issues and probably stimulated FAA's unsuccessful endrun on both FCC and NTIA.

So my bottom line is that the spectrum inventory will have little net success, other than employing K Street lawyers, unless it is accompanied by at least some progress in:

1. clarifying "harmful interference",
   
2. receiver standards, and
   
3. NTIA/IRAC reform.

Chmn. Genachowski Expected This PM
Adelstein Departure

Acting Chairman Copps sent the following message to FCC staff today on the transition:

"Today a new Commission begins to take shape with the arrival this afternoon of our new Chairman, Julius Genachowski. I know everyone joins me in giving Julius a warm FCC welcome and in wishing him all the best as he begins what promises to be a very distinguished chairmanship. He knows the FCC well, having worked here previously, and he brings impressive experience and innovative thinking with him. I am looking forward to working with Julius.

Today also marks the final day as Commissioner for my friend and colleague Jonathan Adelstein. Jonathan has been a tremendous colleague to work with over the past seven-plus years. Experienced, smart, personable and truly dedicated to the public interest, he has served the country, and the Commission, exceedingly well. I join you in wishing him all good things as he moves ahead in the confirmation process toward becoming Administrator of the RUS.

Also we look forward to the imminent swearing-in of Rob McDowell for a full term. Rob goes in one day from being the junior to the second most-senior among Commissioners. Based on the record he has compiled here and on the thorough and collegial way he works, I know Rob will be a critically-important part of the new Commission's success.

I mentioned at the outset a "new" FCC--but that's not really how it is. There's an ongoing FCC, peopled with the most talented public servants this town has to offer, and their work--your work--day-in, day-out, is what gives this place continuity, character and class. I have been so incredibly privileged the past five months to be your Acting Chairman. It's an experience I will always remember, and what I will remember most is being surrounded by so many talented and dedicated folks who really want to--and do--make a difference in people's lives.

We've had some extraordinary challenges during these five short months. Coping with the many unmet challenges of the DTV transition occupied much of our time as we fielded a team and a program to accomplish in a few months time things that should have been top-priority for a few years. It was really an exercise in going grassroots as hundreds of you took up the cause and made an incredible difference in helping people prepare for the big switch to digital. The effort isn't over yet, but we can all take pride in your Herculean and successful efforts to smooth out what would otherwise have been a horrendously bumpy road for millions of consumers. While DTV occupied much of our time over these months, so did launching the broadband initiative mandated by Congress and the President. Developing a broadband plan for the nation between now and next February is one of the greatest challenges--and opportunities--ever to come the Commission's way. There were so many other items and issues being dealt with over these five months that I wouldn't try to list them all, but they, too, were of huge importance to many, many Americans.

It is the ongoing daily work of the Commission--which doesn't often capture the headlines-- that is, in the final analysis, what gives us credibility and what gets our mission accomplished. This place is filled to the rafters with unsung heroes. And one thing that I really tried to encourage over these past five months was to create an environment wherein each member of our FCC family can communicate and work and create to the fullest extent possible.

So to each of you, I want to say "Thank you." Thank you for your dedication to serving the American people. Thank you for your commitment to doing your job as well as that job can possibly be done. And thank you for going out of your way to help me along the way--over these past five months especially, but over the course of the eight years that I have been privileged to work here.

Don't read this as "Farewell" however, because I plan to stick around and continue fighting for the causes I believe it. I just wanted to take this special moment to say a heartfelt thank you for being there for the American people. "

UPDATE - At 4:15 PM Chmn. Genachowski arrived in building and sent FCC staff a message saying, among other things, that he looks forward to "doing a lot of listening and learning" in the "coming days and weeks". He will address the staff tomorrow afternoon.

Public Notice announcing Chairman's Office staff.

6/30 Address to FCC Staff
Excerpt:

"(C)ommunications technology has the power to transform lives for the better.
That’s never been more true than today. Communications must play a role in solving many of our nation’s most pressing challenges. It’s the FCC’s job –our job –to turn this aspiration into reality. We will be judged by whether we find concrete, practical ways to improve the lives of all of our nation’s people."

Chairman Genachowski Confirmed

Chairman Genachowski was confirmed by the Senate yesterday. No word yet on swearing in.

Senators also approved Robert M. McDowell to serve a second term on the commission. The White House said it had sent to the Senate the nominations of Meredith Attwell Baker, a former head of NTIA, and Mignon L. Clyburn, a South Carolina regulator, to serve on the commission. (Broadcasting & Cable coverage.)

The Senate also approved by unanimous consent the nomination of Larry Strickling as assistant secretary of Commerce for communications and information, which is the title for the top executive at Commerce's National Telecommunications & Information Administration.

Wikipedia bio:

Julius Genachowski (born August 19, 1962) is an American business executive with experience in telecommunication and technology issues. He is Barack Obama's nominee to chair the Federal Communications Commission.^[1]

Education

Genachowski grew up in Great Neck, New York and received his B.A. in history in 1985 magna cum laude, from Columbia College, Columbia University, where he was an editor of the Columbia Daily Spectator. He received his J.D. in 1991 from Harvard Law School, where he was a notes editor at the Harvard Law Review^[2] when it was headed by Barack Obama, who graduated in the same year. After graduating from Harvard, also magna cum laude, Genachowski clerked for the Honorable Abner J. Mikva on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, and then at the U.S. Supreme Court for two years, for Justices William J. Brennan and David Souter.^[3]

Government and business experience

He worked on the select committee investigating the Iran-Contra Affair and for U.S. Representative (now Senator) Chuck Schumer.^[4] He was General Counsel of the Federal Communications Commission under Chairman Reed Hundt, a position he left in 1996 to go into business.

Genachowski was Chief of Business Operations and a member of Barry Diller's Office of the Chairman at IAC/InterActiveCorp. He had previously served on the Boards of Directors of Expedia, Hotels.com and Ticketmaster.^[2]

He is a co-founder of LaunchBox Digital and Rock Creek Ventures.^[3] He is also a special advisor at General Atlantic and a member of the Boards of Directors at The Motley Fool, Web.com, Mark Ecko Enterprises, and Beliefnet.^[3] He was appointed to the board of JackBe in April 2006. ^[5]

Genachowski serves as a board member of Common Sense Media, a leading organization seeking to improve the media lives of children and families; and as an advisory board member of Environmental Entrepreneurs (E2). He also recently helped found the New Resource Bank, the country’s first commercial "green bank."^[2]

Obama campaign and transition

For the Obama 2008 Presidential Campaign, Genachowski was Chairman of the Technology, Media and Telecommunications policy working group that created the Obama Technology and Innovation Plan.^[6] He also advised and guided the Obama campaign’s innovative use of technology and the Internet for grassroots engagement and participation.

He co-led the Technology, Innovation, and Government Reform Group for president-electBarack Obama's presidential transition team.^[7] On January 12, 2009, several news outlets reported that Genachowski would be President-Elect Obama's choice to head the Federal Communications Commission as Chairman. This was confirmed by a press release on March 3, 2009. ^[8]

Personal

He is married to Rachel Goslins, a documentary filmmaker. His parents are Eastern European Jews who survived the Holocaust.^[9] His cousin, Menachem Genack, is an Orthodox rabbi and the CEO of the Orthodox Union Kosher Division.^[10]

Papers from 6/25 New America Foundation
Spectrum Workshop
Now Available

Video recording of workshop

The End of Spectrum ‘Scarcity’

Wireless is the most cost-effective and rapid means to bring broadband access to under-served rural and urban residents. Even after high-capacity Internet access becomes universal, wireless remains as the complementary infrastructure needed to achieve the larger goal of pervasive connectivity. Within a few short years, most Americans are likely to spend more hours each week on mobile than on wired Internet connections. Demand for spectrum will outpace availability under current spectrum man-management policies. Meanwhile, in every… more

Michael Calabrese |

A Potential Alliance for World-Wide Dynamic Spectrum Access

Dynamic Spectrum Access (DSA) Systems are one of the most promising technologies available to increase the range and efficiency of spectrum dependent services. DSA systems locate unused spectrum, and organize their users to operate within the spectrum they have identified. DSA systems ensure no interference to other users by scanning and sensing the environment, as the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) NeXt Generation spectrum sharing field tests have established, or through pre-existing knowledge, such as the geolocation database… more

Preston F. Marshall

New Approaches to Private Sector Sharing of Federal Government Spectrum

As the U.S. economy and society becomes more and more information-centric and mobile, wireless systems are becoming a major factor in the efficient functioning of our society. Radio spectrum is a key economic input into wireless systems that power our information society and economy and enhance public safety and national security. Since the earliest days of radio regulation in the United States; federal government use of spectrum has been handled independently of other users’ access to spectrum. … more

Michael Marcus

Revitalizing the Public Airwaves

The time has arrived for the unmet potentials of federal white spaces to receive some well-deserved attention. While many policy analysts have focused on the fate of the 700 MHz auctions, the digital TV transition, and the promise of television white space devices, the best available data suggests that the majority of federal spectrum capacity is left unused (McHenry, 2003; McHenry, 2004) – a situation that has gone largely unexamined. Strategic reuse of this spectrum could help obviate the need… more

Sascha Meinrath, Victor Pickard

Evan Kwerel to be Recognized
by FCBA on Thursday

Dr. Evan Kwerel of the FCC's Office of Strategic Planning & Policy Analysis will be honored at the FCBA's Spring Reception on Thursday, June 25, 2009. He will receive the FCBA’s second Excellence in Government Service award. The award was created in late 2007 to recognize individuals with long-term careers in the federal government in the field of communications who are dedicated to the pursuit of excellence in public service.

Evan was the major intellectual force behind the FCC's spectrum auction program and many other applications of economic concepts to spectrum management. He was reviled for years by some in the wireless industry for his ideas, but his pioneering work is now known and copied all over the world. He is one of the finest civil servants I ever had the honor of working with.

An old bio:

Evan Kwerel has been a senior economist in the Office of Plans and Policy at the Federal Communications Commission since 1983. He has worked on broad range of spectrum policy issues and has been a proponent of market-based approaches to spectrum management. After Congress granted the FCC auction authority in 1993, he had primary responsibility for developing the FCC's innovative simultaneous multiple round auction methodology. He has also been involved in a variety of common carrier matters, including the development of price cap regulation.

Dr. Kwerel received a Ph.D. in economics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1976. From 1976 to 1982, he was an assistant professor of economics at Yale University. In 1981 he was a Brookings Economic Policy Fellow, and from 1982 to 1983, he was a senior economist with the President's Council of Economic Advisers.

Congratulations, Evan, on this honor well deserved!

The End of Spectrum ‘Scarcity'
Opportunistic Access to the Airwaves

Here is the announcement for a conference I am speaking at on Thursday. Note you should RSVP if you want to attend.

The conference will be webcast live:
http://www.newamerica.net/events/2009/end_spectrum_scarcity

As the FCC begins its year-long process to recommend a National Broadband Plan, one starting point is to unlock publicly-owned assets that can facilitate ubiquitous, affordable broadband access. Wireless spectrum remains the most cost-effective and rapid means to deliver broadband access to rural and unserved urban residents. But as mobile broadband use continues to increase exponentially, demand for spectrum will rapidly outpace availability under current spectrum management policies.

Public policy seems stymied by the myth that spectrum is scarce. In reality, only government permission to access the airwaves (licenses) is scarce – spectrum capacity itself is barely used in most locations and at most times. This underutilized spectrum represents enormous, untapped, public capacity for high-speed and pervasive broadband connectivity. It is vital to a national broadband plan to consider policies that will encourage more intensive and efficient use of the nation’s spectrum resources.

What combination of technologies and policy reforms can open the airwaves and enable an era of pervasive connectivity? Our panel includes technology and policy experts who believe dynamic, opportunistic access to underutilized spectrum – especially federal government bands – is feasible if we can only muster the political will. One promising mechanism for making substantial new allocations of spectrum available for wireless broadband deployments and other innovation is to leverage the TV Bands Database that will be certified by the FCC for unlicensed access to vacant TV channels. Several papers describing this and other ideas to achieve more shared, dynamic spectrum access will be released at this event.

Start: 06/25/2009 - 12:15pm

End: 06/25/2009 - 1:45pm

New America Foundation

1899 L Street NW, 4th Floor

Washington, 20036

United States

See map: Google Maps

Participants

Kevin Werbach
Assistant Professor of Law, the Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania
Co-lead on the Obama Administration's FCC Transition review

Preston Marshall
Director, Information Sciences Institute, Viterbi School of Engineering, University of Southern California
Former Program Manager, DARPA
Next Generation Communications

Michael Marcus
Director, Marcus Spectrum Solutions

Tom Stroup
CEO, Shared Spectrum Company

Sascha Meinrath
Director, Open Technology Initiative, New America Foundation

Michael Calabrese
Vice President and Director, Wireless Future Program, New America Foundation