Subject: [NEXTEL-1] POOOOOOOWWWWWWWWWWWW!

From: Marcel <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 19:05:55 -0800

-------- Original Message --------
     Subject: RE: [PWF] 900 MHz Interference (continued)
        Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2003 12:39:43 -0500
        From: "Todd Ellis" <[email-masked]>
    Reply-To: [email-masked]
Organization: Booth & Associates, Inc.
          To: <[email-masked]>

Jim:

I’m tiring of your attitude.  We try very hard to remain as professional
as we can in the light of absolutely poor corporate citizens, bad
engineering, and situations like our clients are finding themselves in
at absolutely no fault of their own.  We tire of individuals like
yourself that would rather throw a wrench in the machinery instead of
trying to come up with a better solution to fix the problem.  I wish you
luck in trying harder next time.

I was specifically answering what I interpreted as a slight against our
firm.  Bad judgement on the original writer’s attempt, and bad judgment
of yours for pursuing something you have nothing to do with.

If you can contribute to the issue, please do so.  I’m sure our
moderator would like to see participants answer to the issues, and not
your insecurities.

Have a nice day.

Todd Ellis

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 11:56 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [PWF] 900 MHz Interference (continued)

Hey Todd,

Did you pay advertising commission to the list???  I don't think,
despite your pronouncement of Professional Engineers, etc, that your
current actions are very professional.  Perhaps you should review what
this list is and what the real meaning of professional is and what
ethics are.

Cordially,
Jim
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

At 06:34 AM 3/2/03 -0500, you wrote:

One comment, and one comment only on Bob s post.

Booth & Associates, Inc. is a 24/7 company.  All Operations Managers and
Vice Presidents, which consist of each operating division of the
company, carry pagers for emergency service needs.  We have been called
out in the dead of night to assist with a variety of major problems from
bridges being knocked out by errant barges, communication shelters that
collapse due to flooding, and yes, more often than not, for forensic
engineering when there s been a death by electrocution.  We ve been in
Jon boats, scraping over the top of 8-foot barbed wire fences that
normally surround substations during floods, and we ve helped clients
get emergency verbal STAs in time of dire need.  When the phone rings,
we re there.  Our very first clients from 42 years ago when our company
was founded are STILL our clients.  Even now as an employee-owned
consortium with over 550 employees, we still provide these services to
our clients everyday.

Let there be no confusion about the dedication of our company, and
specifically my own.

Todd Ellis

Booth & Associates, Inc.

A Utility Services Associates Company

Raleigh, North Carolina

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

Subject: [Fwd: RE: [PWF] 900 MHz Interference (continued)]
From: Marcel <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 18:26:36 -0800

-------- Original Message --------
     Subject: RE: [PWF] 900 MHz Interference (continued)
        Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2003 12:39:43 -0500
        From: "Todd Ellis" <[email-masked]>
    Reply-To: [email-masked]
Organization: Booth & Associates, Inc.
          To: <[email-masked]>

Jim:

I’m tiring of your attitude.  We try very hard to remain as professional
as we can in the light of absolutely poor corporate citizens, bad
engineering, and situations like our clients are finding themselves in
at absolutely no fault of their own.  We tire of individuals like
yourself that would rather throw a wrench in the machinery instead of
trying to come up with a better solution to fix the problem.  I wish you
luck in trying harder next time.

I was specifically answering what I interpreted as a slight against our
firm.  Bad judgement on the original writer’s attempt, and bad judgment
of yours for pursuing something you have nothing to do with.

If you can contribute to the issue, please do so.  I’m sure our
moderator would like to see participants answer to the issues, and not
your insecurities.

Have a nice day.

Todd Ellis

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 11:56 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [PWF] 900 MHz Interference (continued)

Hey Todd,

Did you pay advertising commission to the list???  I don't think,
despite your pronouncement of Professional Engineers, etc, that your
current actions are very professional.  Perhaps you should review what
this list is and what the real meaning of professional is and what
ethics are.

Cordially,
Jim
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------

At 06:34 AM 3/2/03 -0500, you wrote:

One comment, and one comment only on Bob s post.

Booth & Associates, Inc. is a 24/7 company.  All Operations Managers and
Vice Presidents, which consist of each operating division of the
company, carry pagers for emergency service needs.  We have been called
out in the dead of night to assist with a variety of major problems from
bridges being knocked out by errant barges, communication shelters that
collapse due to flooding, and yes, more often than not, for forensic
engineering when there s been a death by electrocution.  We ve been in
Jon boats, scraping over the top of 8-foot barbed wire fences that
normally surround substations during floods, and we ve helped clients
get emergency verbal STAs in time of dire need.  When the phone rings,
we re there.  Our very first clients from 42 years ago when our company
was founded are STILL our clients.  Even now as an employee-owned
consortium with over 550 employees, we still provide these services to
our clients everyday.

Let there be no confusion about the dedication of our company, and
specifically my own.

Todd Ellis

Booth & Associates, Inc.

A Utility Services Associates Company

Raleigh, North Carolina

-----Original Message-----
From: rcwallenb <[email-masked]> [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 12:40 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [PWF] 900 MHz Interference (continued)

Alan T.,
You're being much too kind in your recent response to my post about
the potential for Nextel to cause interference to 900 MHz users.
Makes a fella wonder when an attorney is being so cordial!
OK, here's my replies to yours:

A:Ummm..... it's not cellularized iDEN that's the problem (and
Cellular A and B are causing a lot of problems to private systems in
a lot of locations).  It's ANY cellularized operation (meaning
multiple low sites with many frequencies at the same location), which
increases the opportunities for bad IM products to be created.
That's why we're trying to fix this as an overall thing, not a case-
by-case fix.

B:I used the term "cellularized iDEN" to differentiate it from high-
site iDEN systems as had been proposed by NeoWorld. You're correct in
stating that it's the low-height/high ERP/multi-channel sites that
are the root cause of the problem. The A band cellular could be just
as bad but it's not interleaved with the 800 MHz channels so it's not
as likely to be a problem.
***************
A (re the potential for 900 MHz interference):  I agree, that's why
we've always had the 900 MHz issue "on the table" with Nextel, and
that's why we're still in the process of working out an agreement
under the Consensus Plan to minimize (if not totally prevent) this
from happening.  However, the engineers from all sides (Nextel,
public safety and private) were working on coming to an agreement for
800 MHz first, because of the very limited time frame.  Now that
we've finally finished with the rounds and re-rounds of comments, we
can devote engineer time to 900 MHz (we're also going to work on re-
fining Appendix F with regard to measurement techniques).  In fact,
there are a group of 900 MHz licensees who have already met with
Nextel to work on this (I'm not looking to steal that person's
thunder, so if he wants to give you more info, he's on this board and
can step up and say more here).

B: I can appreciate the fact that a lot of time and energy has been
put into the proposed compromise but by the very definition, it's a
proposed "consent reached by mutual concessions." I don't think any
reasoned or informed person would believe that the commission would
have granted FleetCall/Nextel the favorable rulings and waivers that
it did had it known that they would result in the current situation.
If you accept that premise, then it would be unconscionable for the
commission to allow the same problem to replicate in another band,
e.g., 900 MHz. You don't fix things if they're not broken but you
also don't allow things to be broken just so you can try and fix them
later. Nextel should not be allowed to use cellularized iDEN (or any
form of cellular service) in the 900 MHz band.
****************
A (re prohibiting Nextel from building out iDEN at 900 MHz): Well, in
a COOPERATIVE effort, that might be accomplishable (did I just make
up a word?).  In an adversarial effort, by the time
that "prohibition" that you suggest happened in a rule making
proceeding, you'll be a much, much older man than you are now.  And,
in the end of that adversarial battle, the only winner is us
attorneys.   I know how you hate paying my and Curt's bills (ok, just
teasing), so I'm working to try to minimize that future battle.

I think that you have to recognize that we're working hard on these
and other issues with Nextel, to make this thing work.  It's an
amazing effort to bring together public safety, private and Nextel,
each with wildly divergent views, into a compromise situation.  The
amount of time spent on this by ALL of the participants was/is
incredible.  And, for me personally, I "heard" you in an e-mail that
you sent to me many months ago about potential 900 MHz problems, and
it was always there as an issue to be resolved.  We just had to
resolve 800 MHz quicker, because that interference is today, there
just wasn't time for everything at once.

B: Again, I'm appreciative of the work that's been done but the
problem needs to be contained and not allowed to spread.

I see where Todd Ellis made a recent post that summarized comments
that the 900 MHz Industrial Users Group filed in the current
proceeding. Todd's group is taking the position that it's inevitable
that Nextel will build out their system at 900 MHz and to minimize
the interference they the following:
Nextel will give potentially impacted incumbents 30 day notice of
construction;
Nextel will provide an "interference hot line" to call;
A third party will be hired to assess suspected cases of interfernce;
Nextel must resolve the interference within 3 days;
If not resolved in 3 days, the FCC Enforcement Division will be
brought in;
If the Enforcement Division determines that Nextel is at fault,
Nextel will be fined and required to shut the site down.

Needless to say Nextel is not buying into the suggested constraints.
But suppose they did, is it a solution? No, it's a box of bandaids
and I sure as heck don't want the wounds that necessitate them.

There's also some talk that perhaps the subscriber units' receivers
need to be improved.

Here's my analogy to these suggestions.
A government agency releases an incarcerated mugger because their
laws are inadequate to contain him. He has a proven history of doing
harm to others but that's academic. Before he's even released, he's
already planning to perpetrate other crimes. The agency knows this so
they warn the public in advance that they're soon going to release
the individual and that they ought to put bars on their windows
(tighter receivers). The public is also given a hot line that they
can call once they're mugged. A white collar engineer will first
respond to the hot line request (within 3 days-does that include
weekends and holidays?) and if that's not sufficient to prevent
further abuse, then the Enforcement Division is dispatched 3 days
later with a NAL book to possibly issue a fine and put cuffs on the
suspect.

Is this what I am going to be subjected to? Are the SMR subscribers
going to be satisfied with the explanation that both the FCC, the SMR
operator and Nextel all knew of the potential for interference but
did little or nothing to prevent it from occuring? I hardly think so.
The same goes for any other users of the 900 MHz band.

Another proposed idea is to run tests on 900 MHz in a couple of
cities to see what develops. My gut instinct tells me that unless
there are many Nextel cell sites constructed in a close configuration
akin to what they're using at 800 MHz and the system is heavily
loaded, it won't be a true test. If in fact a valid test can be
conducted and it shows little or no interference then I humbly
suggest that the 800 MHz problem could, in fact, be resolved by
Nextel's use of improved site equipment.

Guess I can't be more negative and non-conciliatory but to not stand
up and be counted would be foolhardy on my part.

Bob Wallenburg
Electrocom, Inc.

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

The Private Wireless Forum
for Mobile Communication Professionals
Private Radio & Wireless Industry News, Views, Information & More

Welcome new PWF readers!
This group is MORE than just email!
Check out the PWF Files, Links, & Archived Message areas on it's
web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PrivateWirelessForum
___________________________________________________

IWCE 2003 March 10-14 - Las Vegas, Nevada Convention Center
More Info: http://iwce-mrt.com/iwce/index
___________________________________________________

Small Business In Telecommunications
IWCE  2003 "Jam Session"  Tuesday March 11, 2003
9:00AM - 1:00 PM Room N256 - Las Vegas Convention Center
More info: [email-masked]
___________________________________________________

PLEASE...remember to TRIM (edit/cut/delete) all unnecessary
parts of messages you reply to -- scrolling thru all the "clutter"
is a pain for everyone. Thanks for your cooperation!

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

The Private Wireless Forum
for Mobile Communication Professionals
Private Radio & Wireless Industry News, Views, Information & More

Welcome new PWF readers!
This group is MORE than just email!
Check out the PWF Files, Links, & Archived Message areas on it's
web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PrivateWirelessForum
___________________________________________________

IWCE 2003 March 10-14 - Las Vegas, Nevada Convention Center
More Info: http://iwce-mrt.com/iwce/index
___________________________________________________

Small Business In Telecommunications
IWCE  2003 "Jam Session"  Tuesday March 11, 2003
9:00AM - 1:00 PM Room N256 - Las Vegas Convention Center
More info: [email-masked]
___________________________________________________

PLEASE...remember to TRIM (edit/cut/delete) all unnecessary
parts of messages you reply to -- scrolling thru all the "clutter"
is a pain for everyone. Thanks for your cooperation!

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

                   Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                       ADVERTISEMENT

The Private Wireless Forum
for Mobile Communication Professionals
Private Radio & Wireless Industry News, Views, Information & More

Welcome new PWF readers!
This group is MORE than just email!
Check out the PWF Files, Links, & Archived Message areas on it's
web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PrivateWirelessForum
___________________________________________________

IWCE 2003 March 10-14 - Las Vegas, Nevada Convention Center
More Info: http://iwce-mrt.com/iwce/index
___________________________________________________

Small Business In Telecommunications
IWCE  2003 "Jam Session"  Tuesday March 11, 2003
9:00AM - 1:00 PM Room N256 - Las Vegas Convention Center
More info: [email-masked]
___________________________________________________

PLEASE...remember to TRIM (edit/cut/delete) all unnecessary
parts of messages you reply to -- scrolling thru all the "clutter"
is a pain for everyone. Thanks for your cooperation!

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.