Subject: [NEXTEL-1] FCC BEGINS INQUIRY AND PROPOSED RULEMAKING REGARDING "INTERFERENCE TEMPERATURE" APPROACH FOR INTERFERENCE MANAGEMENT

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 12:08:16 -0500

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE     News Media Contact
November 13, 2003       Lauren M. Van Wazer

         (202) 418-0030

FCC BEGINS INQUIRY AND PROPOSED RULEMAKING REGARDING "INTERFERENCE TEMPERATURE"
APPROACH FOR INTERFERENCE MANAGEMENT

 Washington, D.C. – In light of the ever increasing demand for radio spectrum,
and recognizing the additional challenges this presents for effectively managing
interference, the FCC today adopted a Notice of Inquiry and Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking that sets forth and seeks comment on a possible new way to quantify
and manage interference among different services.

Termed “interference temperature,” this model for addressing interference takes
into account the actual cumulative radiofrequency (RF) energy from transmissions
of spectrum-based devices, and would set a maximum cap on the aggregate of these
transmissions.  In contrast, the current approach for managing interference
focuses on specifying and limiting the transmit powers of individual
spectrum-based devices as the chief way to prevent interference.

The “interference temperature” approach may facilitate more intensive use of the
radio spectrum, creating the opportunities for new services and improving the
predictability of any interference to existing services.

 The Notice of Inquiry seeks comment on a number of issues related to the need
for, development, and implementation of an interference temperature model for
managing interference.

To test the potential usefulness and applicability of this approach, which was
included as one of the recommendations of the Spectrum Policy Task Force, the
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeks comment on various technical rules that
would establish procedures and use the interference temperature model on a
limited basis in the following two bands:  6525-6700 MHz and portions of the
12.75-13.25 GHz bands.

 Specifically, these procedures would enable unlicensed devices to operate in
these bands, which are used primarily for satellite uplinks and fixed
point-to-point microwave services.  The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking also seeks
comment on whether the possible introduction of unlicensed operation into these
bands would impact these existing services.

 Action by the Commission November 13, 2003, by Notice of Inquiry and Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (FCC 03-289).  Chairman Powell, Commissioners Abernathy,
Copps, and Martin with Commissioner Adelstein approving in part and concurring
in part.  Chairman Powell, Commissioners Copps and Adelstein issued separate
statements.

ET Docket No. 03-237

- FCC -

Office of Engineering & Technology Contact: Gary R. Thayer (202) 418-2290, John
Reed (202) 418-2455, Ahmed Lahjouji (202) 418-2061.
=====================================================================================

SEPARATE STATEMENT OF
CHAIRMAN MICHAEL K. POWELL

Re: Establishment of Interference Temperature Metric to Quantify and Manage
Interference and to Expand Available Unlicensed Operation in the Fixed, Mobile
and Satellite Frequency Bands. (Adopted November 13, 2003)

The introduction of a new “interference temperature” model has the potential to
tremendously improve radio spectrum management.  Rather than assess interference
based solely on transmitter operations, the interference temperature model
introduced in the Commission’s Spectrum Policy Task Force Report takes into
account the cumulative effects of all undesired radio frequency energy.  The
marketplace demands for spectrum require that we explore new ways to use this
resource more efficiently.

The Notice of Inquiry seeks comment on various technological factors and the
process for managing the transition to a new interference temperature paradigm.
The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeks comments on technical rules that would
establish proper limits and procedures for assessing interference temperature.
Moreover, the NPRM proposes to begin experimenting with the interference
temperature approach on a limited basis in select frequency bands and recommends
imposing restrictions on unlicensed devices that would include limiting the
transmitter output power and requirements to use transmit power control (TPC)
and dynamic frequency selection (DFS).

I fully support consideration of this new approach to interference control and
spectrum management.  It promises to promote more efficient use of spectrum and
encourage new and innovative uses of this important resource for the benefit of
the American public.

=================================================================================

STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER
MICHAEL J. COPPS

RE: Establishment of an Interference Temperature Metric to Quantify and Manage
Interference to Expand Available Unlicensed Operation in Certain Fixed, Mobile
and Satellite Frequency Bands.

I’m excited to see the beginning of the examination of whether we can put the
spectrum temperature concept into practice.  As I’ve said before, I think that
the idea has great promise, if we use it as a tool to increase the efficiency
with which spectrum resources are put to use, as is our statutory
responsibility.

I hope that commenters will use the NOI to address an issue that is of
particular concern to me.  While the interference temperature metric may be a
good new way to measure interference, we do not have an adequate way to
determine what the right interference temperature is for a given band.  The only
tools we have for this job are the ill-fitting and ill-defined “interference”
and “harmful interference” concepts.  The inappropriateness and inadequacy of
these concepts for the job of prospectively setting interference temperature
will make this new metric very hard to use predictably and non-arbitrarily in
the real world.

So I think that the Commission must work to improve the standard we use to
determine permissible levels of interference, whether using the interference
temperature metric or some other metric.  And I believe that an important side
benefit of the added predictability that a better standard would bring is that
incumbent spectrum users would be more comfortable with the interference
temperature metric.  This NOI is the perfect vehicle to start the process.

====================================================================================

SEPARATE STATEMENT OF
COMMISSIONER JONATHAN S. ADELSTEIN
APPROVING IN PART, CONCURRING IN PART

Re:  In re Establishment of an Interference Temperature Metric to Quantify and
Manage Interference and to Expand Available Unlicensed operation in the Fixed,
Mobile and Satellite Frequency Bands; ET Docket No. 03-XX

I commend the Spectrum Policy Task Force and its members for their 2002 report
and for bringing to the Commission’s attention a new interference temperature
approach to spectrum management.  The Task Force noted that the “increasing
demand for spectrum-based services and devices are straining longstanding, and
outmoded, spectrum policies.”  I could not agree more.  The reality is that we
cannot produce more spectrum.  We need to foster a framework for innovation that
enables new technologies to come forward to meet demand more efficiently – in
both the private and public sectors.

Most significantly, the Task Force report offered specific findings and
recommendations that have been very useful in stimulating debate in the area of
spectrum management.  The concept of interference temperature is a particularly
significant recommendation, and I very much look forward to a full and vigorous
discussion on this challenging issue.  I recognize that this is one of the more
controversial proposals to come out of the report, but believe that it is
entirely appropriate for the Commission to seek comment on new approaches to
spectrum management.  Whatever the outcome, the deliberation process makes us a
better, more informed agency, and I encourage all interested parties to file
comments in this proceeding.

I have previously noted my belief that the Commission should strive to push the
boundaries to accommodate new technologies provided that they do not cause
harmful interference.  Indeed, a little noticed provision of the Communications
Act, Section 157, reads that “It shall be the policy of the United States to
encourage the provision of new technologies and services to the public.”  If an
interference temperature model for quantifying and managing interference can be
developed so that it truly prevents real harmful interference and allows for the
provision of new technologies and services, then we should encourage its
development.  I do not know if we are there yet, but I very much look forward to
the debate.

Finally, while I support the discussion in the item considering the application
of the interference temperature approach to unlicensed operations in the
6525-6700 MHz and 12.75-13.25 GHz bands, I do not believe that this portion of
the item should be styled as a Notice of Proposed Rule Making, as opposed to
remaining part of the Notice of Inquiry.  I think it is very clear that we are
exploring an entirely new concept in the interference temperature model, and it
is quite premature to actually discuss proposed rules when the Commission has
not even engaged in a preliminary discussion on the interference temperature
approach as a whole.

I am not sure what the rush is and am not convinced that moving this discussion
to the NOI portion of the item somehow holds back our consideration of the
interference temperature approach.  I think the licensees in these bands deserve
better.  For this reason, I can only concur to the NPRM portion of this item.

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.
http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/61FxlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/