SIA ASKS FCC TO TAKE SWIFT ACTION AGAINST RADAR DETECTORS

Radar detectors are emitting power levels that are greatly in excess of norms established by FCC for unlicenced devices, SIA said. It said radar detector in automobile passing by or parked near VSAT terminal or other satellite earth station could “easily break the satellite communications link.” Many SIA companies independently have identified devices as cause of interference, Dalbello said. Problem has been around since early 1990s, he said, but it gradually has gotten worse. Radar detectors have begun to encroach more seriously on VSAT bands since they changed their operational frequencies to adapt to changes in police radar guns, he said.

Radio Assn. Defending Airwave Rights (RADAR) said its members would voluntarily limit radar detector emissions over VSAT receive band at 11.7-12.2 GHz to Class B levels -- levels Commission has set for most unintentional radiators. RADAR said limitations would be applicable to units that were imported or domestically manufactured on or after June 1, 2003, making it unnecessary for Commission to establish rules to protect VSAT systems. Attorney Mitchell Lazarus, who represents RADAR, said members are “unilaterally and voluntarily” committed to complying with Class B levels “no matter what the FCC does.” Once RADAR members are in compliance with Class B rules, controversy should end, Lazarus said: “We would be putting no more noise into their band than hundreds of other devices, like PCs or palm pilots.” Radar detectors are unregulated because they're classified as unintentional radiators and FCC rules exempt receivers that tune only above 960 MHz.

Commission’s rules should be modified to add radar detectors as type of receiver and radiated emission limits should apply to radar detectors, Hughes Network Systems, (HNS) said in comments to FCC. Wide variety of customers have experienced harmful interference from operation of radar detectors, HNS said. Radar detector interference has rendered unusable certain frequencies that HNS has leased from satellite operators, it said, and company still is obligated to pay even though it can’t use capacity.

RADAR said it was unaware of any evidence linking emissions to VSAT interference, and that FCC notice didn’t acknowledge possibility of other sources of interference. It also said interference to VSAT terminal was impermissible only if it seriously degraded, obstructed or repeatedly interrupted service. Lazarus said more facts were needed to determine extent of interference, and brief and very infrequent disruptions might not qualify as harmful. “If it’s very frequent or long, then it might,” he said.

SIA is “happy to hear that RADAR has admitted that they are responsible for causing this interference,” Dalbello said of RADAR’s comments. However, he said, SIA would “strongly disagree” with any position that would defer resolution until June 2003: “SIA is troubled that the reported RADAR position makes no suggestion as to how to reduce and eliminate the problem caused by the radar detectors currently in use.” Dalbello said he also was concerned RADAR members might flood market with devices up until its self-imposed termination date. Lazarus said old devices would be taken out of service by turnover in marketplace and “over period of time” new models would replace old. Delay until 2003 is necessary for manufacturers to redesign, retool and empty present product pipeline, RADAR said.

SIA or its members haven’t begun financial analysis of impact of interference, Dalbello said. Member companies experiencing problem have had to take “extraordinary steps,” including moving satellite dishes, reserving additional spectrum, hiring spectrum consultants and hundreds of hours of engineering time, he said: “Identifying intermittent interference requires long-term monitoring and investigation.”

Interference from radar detectors into VSAT operations is well documented, SES Americom said. It’s clear from reports that VSAT terminal and radar detector don’t need to be in close proximity for problems to occur, it said: “Interference can result with separations of several hundred feet.” Many cases of interference go unreported due to intermittent nature of intrusion, it said. SES said problems were costly to consumers and providers of services and, even when identified, was not easy to solve or prevent. Building RF shields for VSAT antennas isn’t practical solution because installing effective shield can be more complicated than installing antenna itself, and shield could significantly reduce performance of antenna. SES also said interference from radar detectors didn’t constitute only threat, and FCC should address rapidly proliferating unlicenced low-power devices that emit radiation at or near bands used by authorized satellite operations.

RADAR alleged that level of detail in Commission’s notice was “far below that needed to allow interested parties to comment meaningfully.” It asked Commission to lay out description of any newly adopted rules, by way of further notice, so that assn., along with others, could comment effectively. “The notice could conceivably yield any one of a very large number of potential regulatory schemes,” RADAR said. SIA said RADAR and its member companies had been aware of problems at least as long as satellite industry. “It is disingenuous to hid behind some flimsy FCC process excuse,” Dalbello said.