Several entities say they oppose a petition for rulemaking filed by M2M Spectrum Networks LLC asking the FCC to permit use of 900 megahertz band business/industrial land transportation (B/ILT) channels to provide for-profit service to entities eligible to use those frequencies, arguing that it would make it more difficult for critical infrastructure entities (CII) and others to get access to scarce spectrum.

In its comments filed in Rulemaking 11755, the Utilities Telecom Council said it opposed to the petition “because it threatens to prevent utilities and other critical infrastructure industries (CII) from being able to license any additional 900 MHz channels to meet their communications needs. In effect, the petition for rulemaking is an end-run against the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau’s denial of the request by Spectrum Networks Group, LLC (SNG) for a waiver of Section 90.617(c) of the Commission’s rules in order to provide SMR services to Business/Industrial Land Transportation (B/ILT) eligible entities using 900 MHz B/ILT frequencies.  M2M seeks to accomplish by its petition what its parent company, SNG, was unable to do by waiver. UTC opposed the waiver request by SNG, and it opposes the petition for rulemaking by M2M for many of the same reasons that it opposed the waiver request.”

In the order referenced by UTC, the Wireless Bureau’s Mobility Division denied a request by SNG for a waiver of the part 90 rule that bars specialized mobile radio (SMR) systems from being authorized on the 900 MHz business/industrial land transportation pool channels, and it dismissed applications by SNG and eight other parties to operate in those channels (TRDaily, April 13).

SNG wanted to use the spectrum to provide private, internal, machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. UTC and several other entities argued that SNG was proposing a prohibited SMR service (TRDaily, July 31, 2014).

The American Petroleum Institute’s telecommunications subcommittee also opposed the petition filed by M2M. “API’s members are increasingly interested in machine-to-machine data services.  However, the 900 MHz band currently is widely used by B/ILT users and relied upon for mission critical applications across the country,” API said. “The band is used almost exclusively for land mobile voice communications. Even though more than half of the 900 MHz band is already allocated for SMR use, M2M proposes to effectively reallocate the remaining B/ILT channels for SMR purposes to support data services.

“M2M’s proposal would likely effectively remove thousands of channels from the B/ILT pool. The sole protection that M2M proposes is that SMR providers operating on B/ILT channels would be authorized to provide service only to B/ILT entities,” API added. “This would, de facto, establish the 900 MHz B/ILT pool as pay-for-service spectrum held by SMRs. B/ILT spectrum acquired by SMR providers would no longer be available for B/ILT applicants to develop their own private, internal two-way land mobile communications systems, the primary use of the band. This means that a refinery or chemical plant would be unable to expand an existing voice system or a facility would be unable to upgrade use of the 900 MHz band. Instead, M2M’s proposal would effectively repurpose the remaining 900 MHz band B/ILT spectrum to third party commercial providers in many areas.”

The Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA) said it “opposes amending Section 90.617(c) of the Commission’s rules to permit SMR systems on the 900 MHz B/ILT channels and urges the Commission to deny the Petition for Rulemaking. The LCRA does not believe that the use of 900 MHz B/ILT channels to provide a for-profit service to B/ILT eligibles is desirable. The rule change proposed by M2M and its parent company, Spectrum Networks Group, LLC (‘SNG’) would have an adverse effect on the availability of 900 MHz B/ILT spectrum for traditional B/ILT users. The 900 MHz B/ILT spectrum should not be assigned to for-profit operations because it is scarce and is needed by B/ILT users, especially critical infrastructure industry (‘CII’) entities.”

“For reasons detailed by the FCC when it denied the Waiver Request filed by Spectrum Networks Group, LLC (‘SNG’), M2M’s parent company, which sought waiver relief to deploy the same machine-to-machine (‘m2m’) system described in this Petition, and as further explained herein, EWA does not support the proposed rule amendment,” the Enterprise Wireless Alliance said.

“If any rule changes are adopted in this band, those changes should permit the deployment of advanced technologies that promote greater spectrum efficiencies, for example the customer-driven broadband opportunities proposed by EWA and Pacific DataVision, Inc. (‘PDV’), rather than proprietary narrowband technology that could be implemented successfully on spectrum allocated for such applications, including unlicensed spectrum that already is being used successfully to support m2m operations, such as those described in the Petition,” EWA added. “Framing the Petition as an applicant eligibility matter does not alter the fact that permitting the type of data operations M2M proposes would be a colossal misuse of this critical band.”

“If the Commission decides to take further action on the M2M Petition, it should do so either subsequent to further consideration of the PEBB [private enterprise broadband] Proposal in a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking or in conjunction with that rulemaking proceeding,” PDV said in its comments. “In response to a question posed in the Public Notice, PDV does not consider the M2M Petition and the PEBB Proposal as necessarily incompatible. For example, the FCC could modify the eligibility for B/ILT channels below 937 MHz to permit direct SMR access. The Commission also could confirm that M2M is prepared to self-fund any non-coordination costs associated with a band realignment, a commitment made by its parent company, SNG, in seeking waiver relief.”

PDV added that “the sequencing of a band realignment and any eligibility rule change is critical. If the Commission were to accept SMR applications for B/ILT channels throughout the band before implementing the proposed PEBB realignment, it could trigger the filing of some purely speculative SMR applications submitted with the hope of extracting payment for realigning from the PEBB licensee. Even if M2M were to reaffirm SNG’s self-funding commitment, that obligation would not necessarily apply to other SMR licensees. Any such applications could deprive private enterprise users of needed channels as they typically do not seek spectrum without a plan and budget for deploying it, the antithesis of speculative filings. Even limiting any eligibility change to B/ILT channels below 937 MHz could be detrimental if allowed prior to action on the PEBB Proposal. It would create the possibility that speculative SMR licensees could occupy channels that otherwise would be available for realignment in the hope of being paid to cancel their authorizations.”

PCIA said it supports the M2M petition. “The Commission has already determined that permitting flexible use of modified or assigned 900 MHz B/ILT [licensed] services serves the public interest; toward this same end, the Commission should eliminate any uncertainty and make clear that its flexible use policy applies equally to applications for new 900 MHz B/ILT station licenses,” the trade group said. “Accordingly, PCIA supports the initiation of a rulemaking to eliminate the discrepancy between Sections 90.617(c) and 90.621(f) of the Commission’s rules by amending Section 90.617(c) to allow the use of 900 MHz channels to provide for-profit service to third-party B/ILT eligible.”- Paul Kirby

Courtesy TRDaily