YOU ARE AT:WirelessEt tu, Brute?: Julius Knapp, chief of FCC's Office of Engineering and...

Et tu, Brute?: Julius Knapp, chief of FCC’s Office of Engineering and Technology, is under fire

He is one of the most respected, accomplished and well-liked public servants ever to grace the Federal Communications Commission. Now, mobile phone carriers, TV network moguls and others want his head. Julius Knapp, chief of the agency’s Office of Engineering and Technology, has a big target on his back. There is nothing subtle about the disdain gushing his way.
Knapp is running interference so to speak for FCC Chairman Kevin Martin regarding controversial white spaces and advanced wireless services-3 initiatives. The floodgates opened after the OET issued testing reports that concluded unlicensed devices can operate without disruption to others in TV airwaves and that a new national wireless broadband service can coexist in frequencies next to those purchased for billions of dollars by wireless carriers at a 2006 auction.
Broadcasters and their ilk contend the OET’s analysis of white spaces interference testing is flawed. The wireless industry attacked the OET over a report on testing to ascertain potential interference from TDD transmissions in the AWS-3 band (2155-2180 MHz) to cellphone service in the AWS-1 band (2110-2155 MHz).
It is hard to remember a time when the OET was in such a state of siege. The OET generated controversy and suspicion after the release of a 2002 report by the Spectrum Policy Task Force. Among the findings: “Advances in technology create the potential for systems to use spectrum more intensively and to be much more tolerant of interference than in the past.” And: “Preliminary data and general observations indicate that many portions of the radio spectrum are not in use for significant periods of time, and that spectrum use of these ‘white spaces’ (both temporal and geographic) can be increased significantly.”
The new OET reports have created a firestorm of controversy as they effectively clear the way for the FCC to approve the white spaces and AWS-3 measures. Strongly-worded press releases and regulatory filings have been traded among stakeholders in recent days. But the crossfire is not limited to official Washington. The New York City Council appeared poised to pass a resolution urging the FCC to consider potential interference from white spaces devices to TV broadcasters, performing artists, professional sports leagues and all wireless microphone users. In other words, it wants the white spaces item off the FCC’s Nov. 4 agenda. Can’t risk having Broadway go silent.
Broadcasters, citing statements by white-spaces proponents, suspect a conspiracy is afoot to destroy television as we know it. Perhaps, but it rings of the kind of alarmist prophecy made by a desperate candidate capable of looking into the future – say, two weeks from now – and achingly knowing what it holds in store.

ABOUT AUTHOR