WASHINGTON-The fallout of last week’s Federal Communications Commission decision on solving the dead-zone problem saw the chairman’s office denouncing the industry’s response and consumers advocates split.
As expected, the FCC did not mandate technical requirements for how wireless carriers address calls that fall in areas without coverage. Rather, in a 5-0 vote, the FCC gave carriers three ways to address coverage issues.
The Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association drew the wrath of the FCC chairman’s office when it released a statement quoting CTIA President Thomas Wheeler as saying, “This process has taken too long. The wireless industry supports this decision, but it is unfortunate that it has taken four long years for the FCC to make it.”
CTIA’s statement was “disingenuous given the fact [that] for most of the time this proposal has been pending, CTIA has basically said the [FCC] should do nothing and to now say that it took too long for us to make a decision, I think is misleading at best and disingenuous at worst,” said Ari Fitzgerald, wireless legal adviser to FCC Chairman William Kennard.
CTIA would not comment on Fitzgerald’s characterization of the Wheeler statement, but congratulated the FCC on its decision. “I am not going to comment on the timing issue. I congratulate the commission on making a decision on this contentious and emotional issue. I think that in the end, the facts spoke for themselves,” said Brian Fontes, CTIA senior vice president for policy and administration.
The FCC’s decision was largely a win for the industry because it allows the industry, if it chooses, to reject the consumer advocates’ proposal of adequate-strongest-signal technology and choose the industry’s preferred choice of A/B roaming. Both options, plus a third allowed by the FCC, are meant to solve the dead-zone problem.
The dead-zone problem refers to the lack of coverage in some areas where only an A- or B-side cellular carrier offers service.
The Ad Hoc Alliance for Access to 911 petitioned the FCC in 1995 to require carriers to install a chip in handsets that would search for and place 911 calls using the strongest control channel-regardless of which carrier serves the customer. The proposal has since been modified to adequate signal.
CTIA championed A over B roaming. Under this proposal, the phone first would search the preferred side-the subscriber’s carrier’s side-and only place the call on the non-preferred side if no signal could be found. CTIA’s proposal would allow 65 seconds to elapse before the call would be dropped unless the customer cut off first. The Wireless Consumers Alliance claims strongest signal would only take 4-6 seconds.
To cut down on the time issue, the FCC said A/B roaming must be implemented in such a way that after 17 seconds, it would switch to the other carrier. FCC Commissioner Susan Ness said she hoped the industry would chip away at this length even more.
The FCC also said a third option, known as selective retry, satisfied its criteria. Selective retry would have a specific number on the handset labeled for 911 calls. When the customer pushed that button, the handset would first try to contact the customer’s preferred network, but if the “carrier is unable to complete the call, or the call is completed but interrupted, or the user is dissatisfied with the voice quality or some other aspect of the call, the caller can push the 911 button again and the handset will attempt to complete the 911 call via the other cellular carrier,” said the FCC.
There are also instances where neither carrier offers service in some remote areas. The FCC’s rules do not address that issue. In addition, the issue only affects future phones that can default from digital to analog technology. It does not have any impact on the existing 50.4 million analog phones or the 18.8 million digital phones in service today.
Consumer advocates were split on the decision. The original advocate of the decision, Jim Conran of the Ad Hoc Alliance for Access to 911, complimented the FCC, while WCA’s Carl Hilliard questioned details of the FCC’s decision.
“We are pleased that the FCC has taken these important steps in improving public safety and increasing consumer confidence in wireless technology … Quicker reporting of crimes and accidents will allow public-safety officials to react in a faster manner,” Conran said.
While Hilliard questioned many aspects of the yet-to-be-released rules, he noted that requiring changes to A/B roaming amounted to the FCC doing “close to the right thing … It is nice to think that every once in a while, the industry doesn’t succeed in obtaining everything it wants.”
The new technology must be implemented within nine months-by Feb. 13.
“The FCC has made its rule effective nine months from May 13, 1999. It should be fair to assume that this deadline will not be extended,” Hilliard said.
The FCC did not do any independent engineering analyses of the three solutions, instead relying on engineering studies supplied in the record. All of these studies have been conducted by engineers paid for by the proponents of the competing technologies.
Other FCC action-DTV spectrum
In other action, the FCC started the process leading to an auction of spectrum used by TV broadcasters at channels 60-69. The 36 megahertz of spectrum in the 746-764 MHz and 776-794 MHz bands will be auctioned off for commercial purposes.
Although the item is fashioned as a notice of proposed rule making, it was clear from the way James D. Schlichting, deputy chief of the FCC’s Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, talked to reporters after the FCC open meeting, the FCC has no real idea of how this spectrum is to be used. “We don’t have specifics. [We don’t say] ‘We think it should be done this way or that way.’ … The question of exactly what the report and order is going to look like is something the record” will decide, Schlichting said.
The spectrum will be auctioned in 2001, but will not become available until TV broadcasters complete the transition to digital operation. The spectrum in question is used by full-power and low-power TV stations. The NPRM will ask how the full-power TV and public-safety users should be protected from interference.
The FCC also expects to examine how this spectrum should be managed and the licensees regulated, if any regulation is necessary. Rules differ for wireless and broadcast licensees, said FCC officials.
Additionally, the FCC needs to decide what, if any, regulation is necessary on new and innovative services such as point-to-multipoint datacasting, that may in part resemble both broadcast and non-broadcast services.
The Personal Communications Industry Association, wants hopes this NPRM leads to a long-term spectrum management plan and expects to work with the FCC toward this goal, said Mary Madigan Jones, PCIA vice president for external affairs.
