ODV, The FCC released the text of its 5.9 GHz today. You can read it in full here: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-20-164A1.pdf. The language I referred to in my earlier email is paragraphs 92-94 in the final version. Those read as follows: Amateur Operations 92. In the 5.9 GHz NPRM, we tentatively concluded that our proposal to apply the existing U-NII-3 power rules to the 5.850-5.895 GHz band would protect co-channel secondary Amateur Service operations from harmful interference and sought comment on this approach. Proponents of Amateur Services contend that authorizing unlicensed operations in the 5.9 GHz band will cause harmful interference to co-channel Amateur Service operations.[fn] However, they do not include any specific technical analysis for their particular position. These commenters suggest that the Commission should abandon its proposal to authorize unlicensed operations in the U-NII-4 band to avoid harmful interference to amateur operations.[fn] 93. We believe that U-NII devices operating in the U-NII-4 band will not cause harmful interference to amateur operations because of the relatively low power with which U-NII devices will operate as compared to amateur stations, which are permitted to operate with as much as 1.5 kW (62 dBm) peak envelope power.[fn] Furthermore, as noted above, the Amateur Service is an allocated service that is entitled to interference protection within the 5 GHz spectrum, whereas U-NII devices operate under our part 15 rules on the conditions of not causing harmful interference and accepting any interference from an authorized radio station.[fn] 94. Commenters also oppose reallocating the lower 45 megahertz of the 5.9 GHz band from the Amateur Service to part 15 unlicensed operations.[fn] As an initial matter, part 15 unlicensed devices do not operate pursuant to an allocation.[fn] Thus, in the 5.9 GHz NPRM, the Commission did not propose to reallocate the lower 45 megahertz of the 5.9 GHz band from the Amateur Service to part 15 unlicensed operations; it proposed to authorize unlicensed operations under part 15 in the lower 45 megahertz of the 5.9 GHz band.[fn] Therefore, we dismiss such concerns as beyond the scope of this proceeding. Please let me know if you have any questions about this or other language in the FCC’s decision. 73, Dave K3ZJ David R. Siddall Managing Partner DS Law, PLLC 1629 K St. NW, Ste 300 Washington, DC 20006 direct: +1 202 559 4690 Unauthorized Disclosure Prohibited. This e-mail is intended solely for the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is proprietary, confidential or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, it is prohibited to disclose, copy, distribute, or use the contents of this email and its attachments. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all electronic and physical copies of the e-mail message and its attachments. Unintended transmission shall not constitute waiver of attorney-client or any other privilege. Thank you. From: "david@davidsiddall-law.com" <david@davidsiddall-law.com> Date: Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 11:23 PM To: arrl-odv <arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org> Subject: Today's FCC Action on 5.9 GHz ODV, < > What Happened to the 5.9 GHz Amateur Secondary Spectrum? As I earlier reported as the likely outcome, the Commission left the amateur secondary allocation untouched. So we go from potentially sharing the band with a primary user promising millions of automobiles and roadside transmitters “everywhere” sometime in the future and that would have had to be fully protected by amateur operations (and there is at least one instance where a ham had to shut down for interfering with one such experimental system, even though they have been few in number) to sharing 45 megahertz of the band (5.850-5.895 GHz) with Part 15 unlicensed WiFi systems that are likely to occupy the band sooner than intelligent vehicles and with which (a) we can “interfere” without consequence and (b) (theoretically) can require to change or shut down if they interfere with our communications. The upper 30 megahertz (5.895-5.925 GHz) remains the same, sharing with primary user “intelligent vehicles” that will have to be protected. Below is the draft language addressing our status. The language was publicly released as draft, but to prevent confusion among members, please do not quote it until we receive the final language in case it has changed. Final language should be available later this week, and I believe that it will be identical to the below, but it is best to characterize rather than quote until final just in case there have been changes. The draft Commission staff language that addressed the Amateur secondary status throughout the subband under consideration (5.850-5.925 GHz) follows: In the 5.9 GHz NPRM, we tentatively concluded that our proposal to apply the existing U-NII-3 power rules to the 5.850-5.895 GHz band would protect co-channel secondary Amateur Service operations from harmful interference and sought comment on this approach. Proponents of Amateur Services contend that authorizing unlicensed operations in the 5.9 GHz band will cause harmful interference to co-channel Amateur Service operations. [fn] However, they do not include any specific technical analysis for their particular position. These commenters suggest that the Commission should abandon its proposal to authorize unlicensed operations in the U-NII-4 band to avoid harmful interference to amateur operations.[fn] We believe that U-NII devices operating in the U-NII-4 band will not cause harmful interference to amateur operations because of the relatively low power with which U-NII devices will operate as compared to amateur stations, which are permitted to operate with as much as 1.5 kW (62 dBm) peak envelope power. [fn] Furthermore, as noted above, the Amateur Service is an allocated service that is entitled to interference protection within the 5 GHz spectrum, whereas U-NII devices operate under our Part 15 rules on the conditions of not causing harmful interference and accepting any interference from an authorized radio station.[fn] Commenters also oppose reallocating the lower 45 megahertz of the 5.9 GHz band from the Amateur Service to Part 15 unlicensed operations.[fn] As an initial matter, Part 15 unlicensed devices do not operate pursuant to an allocation.[fn] Thus, in the 5.9 GHz NPRM, the Commission did not propose to reallocate the lower 45 megahertz of the 5.9 GHz band from the Amateur Service to Part 15 unlicensed operations; it proposed to authorize unlicensed operations under Part 15 in the lower 45 megahertz of the 5.9 GHz band.[fn] Therefore, we dismiss such concerns as beyond the scope of this proceeding. I will circulate the final document and language when it is released. 73, Dave K3ZJ David R. Siddall Managing Partner DS Law, PLLC 1629 K St. NW, Ste 300 Washington, DC 20006 direct: +1 202 559 4690 Unauthorized Disclosure Prohibited. This e-mail is intended solely for the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is proprietary, confidential or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, it is prohibited to disclose, copy, distribute, or use the contents of this email and its attachments. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all electronic and physical copies of the e-mail message and its attachments. Unintended transmission shall not constitute waiver of attorney-client or any other privilege. Thank you.
