 | |
| |
TechnologyDaily Mobile
The Changing Wireless Policy Dynamics
by Teri Rucker
With New York and Washington reeling from terrorist attacks and planning for war, the agenda on Capitol Hill has shifted almost entirely to how to support the attacks' victims and the military. The wireless industry's designs on spectrum used by the military are not entirely forgotten, although sources say the balance of power in the debate over third-generation (3G) wireless services has shifted.
"Making money is one thing, but saving lives is something else," said Larry Irving, the president of Irving Information Group and a former director of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). That means that "almost every debate is going to be changed significantly," he said, and "whatever they [the military] want right now, they get."
Debate For Another Time
The wireless industry has been aggressively lobbying lawmakers and the Bush administration to urge the Defense Department to share or vacate the 1710 MHz to 1850 MHz band of spectrum, which many other countries use for commercial wireless services. U.S. companies want access to that band to harmonize spectrum use with Europe and Asia, and to offer advanced services.
NTIA, the lead agency overseeing government-held spectrum, and the FCC, which oversees commercial spectrum, are studying options that would balance wireless industry needs with those of sectors that currently use various bands of the airwaves. A second option for potential commercial use is the 2500 MHz to 2690 MHz band currently used by schools for distance education and for fixed wireless broadband services, called multi-channel, multi-point, distribution service.
Neither Defense nor colleges want to relinquish their spectrum, claiming in reports earlier this year that moving to another band would be costly, that there is no where to move, and that sharing spectrum is improbable, if not impossible.
But the debate is stalled for now. "Nothing is important anymore -- from the patients' bill of rights to 3G -- other than what is going to be needed to deal with what we are about to get into," said Michael Chappell, a telecom adviser to Rep. Charles (Chip) Pickering, R-Miss.
Pickering had been drafting legislation to create a process to find spectrum for 3G services. "We had not fully developed what we thought was the right thing to do legislatively," Chappell said. "If things settle down this fall and we get through this, there may be an appropriate time to continue talks."
The Talks That Weren't
Last week, Pickering was supposed to meet with Nancy Victory, NTIA's chief, but that meeting was delayed, and Chappell said 3G discussions with Defense officials also are secondary to recent events. Scheduled meetings between Pentagon officials and NTIA also were postponed.
"Nobody is going to want to try to have DOD spend resources to see if spectrum reallocation is feasible when we are going to be involved in [fighting terrorism]," Chappell said.
The FCC was supposed to finalize an order protecting the 2500 MHz to 2690 MHz band and still is expected to do so, but the timing is now unclear, according to industry and education community sources. Clyde Ennslin, an NTIA spokesman, declined to comment on the 3G debate.
The Senate, which has been more reluctant than the House to side with industry, now is even less compelled by the industry's cause. After Tuesday's attacks, Gary Hoitsma, a spokesman for Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., noted that he had trouble using his cell phone last Tuesday but then wondered whether the military had the communications capability it needs to maintain national security. "That puts some perspective and context to the debate as I see it," Hoitsma said.
Hoitsma said Inhofe likely will explore whether the military has all it needs to communicate and handle its response to terrorism, although not anytime soon.
Newfound Appreciation Of National Security
Earlier this year, the wireless industry waged an aggressive lobbying campaign, arguing that the nation's economic health depended on moving Defense to another band of spectrum. Now at least some industry officials recognize that the military's assertions that national security cannot be compromised are somewhat valid.
The industry "has been very aggressive in its approach, but maybe now they will approach it with an understanding of why the military has been so adamant" about protecting its spectrum, Irving said.
The military uses spectrum in various ways, including for satellite surveillance, to guide smart missiles and to provide radar in its planes -- all things it will need in the coming days. "Terrorism came of age, and the wireless industry came of age," Irving said. The question in balancing spectrum needs will be whether federal, state and local officials can communicate, he said.
Some in the industry agree. The attacks make it "harder to convince the administration and the Department of Defense to go down the road we were going down," said Grant Seiffert, vice president of government relations at the Telecommunications Industry Association.
During hearings on 3G issues, some House lawmakers criticized Defense for refusing to vacate its spectrum, but now that attitude likely has changed, said John Stenbit, assistant secretary of defense. "The asymmetry of risks that are involved in this discussion" are better understood on Capitol Hill now, he said Friday in a meeting with reporters.
It is a difference between "a financial investment portfolio" and life and death, Nesbit said. When a wireless phone call is dropped, the provider has a customer-service problem, "but it is not OK to not have the call go through when you are launching a precision-guided missile," he said.
Industry now hopes the current situation provides "an opportunity to modernize defense," Seiffert said. "If the industry can help them and at the same time there is a way to help industry harmonize with the rest of the world, then we will make that case."
Opportunity For Reason
Irving said past spectrum debates have not been particularly reasoned, and U.S. spectrum management has not been as comprehensive as it could have been, but that could change. "If there is a legacy out of the horror," he said, "maybe officials will create a comprehensive spectrum policy to help those who put their lives on the line every day."
An FCC source also sees an opportunity for a reasonable approach to both the grab for spectrum and its use. "There are not unlimited resources for anything, and we have to use things efficiently -- people, dollars or spectrum," the source said. "The bottom line is everyone is going to have to use spectrum more efficiently."
The source said the same principles that applied before still apply -- that spectrum cannot be viewed in isolation, but in a comprehensive way that allows its best use by government and industry. Right now, the source said, emotions are running high, "but decisions are not going to be made overnight and thoughtful heads will prevail and good, sound, well-thought-out solutions hopefully will be reached."
NEW FEATURE
-Advertisement-
-Advertisement-
-Advertisement-
