Dear Friends of Wireless Messaging,

Sad News

I am very sad to report the death of one of our paging community, and a subscriber to this newsletter. Paul Valois, the owner of Contact Communications in Burlington, Vermont was killed in a fiery plane crash this week as he attempted to land his single-engine Cessna Wednesday at a small airport in Hilltop Lakes, Texas. (About half-way between Houston and Dallas.) A news article follows below, with links to a television video report and an audio recording of an interview of an NTSB spokesperson.

I was very sorry to get this news. Paul and I kept in touch—as I do with many readers. I counted 18 e-mails from him going back to 2002.

Happy News

I am indeed very happy to correct the information that was published here last week about ParkMagic's Pay-by-Phone-Parking services in Chicago.

From: James O'Connell
Date: September 22, 2009 12:45:22 PM CDT
To: Brad Dye
Subject: From The Wireless Messaging Newsletter

Hi Brad,

I just saw your newsletter, dated September 18^th '09. And I saw your reference to ParkMagic.

The information is incorrect. ParkMagic continues to provide Pay by Phone parking services throughout the City of Chicago. Since the privatization of on-street parking in Chicago the ParkMagic system has operated successfully without any issues. Our customers in Chicago rate the service very highly with 97.6% of users stating that they like the service and view it as very valuable. We continue our relationship with Indiana Paging and we are very happy with the service and expertise of the team there.

ParkMagic is also about to announce the deployment of its services in another "top ten" US city in the coming weeks.

Please correct the record. If you have any questions or if you would like further information please feel free to contact me at any time.

Best regards,

Jim

James O'Connell
President
ParkMagic Mobile Technology Inc.
264 South River Road, Suite 484
Bedford NH 03110
Mobile: 617-851-0428
Jim.OConnell@ParkMagicusa.com
 

More News

Now on to more news and views.

Wireless Messaging News
Emergency Radio Communications Wireless Messaging Critical Messaging Telemetry Paging VoIP Wi-Fi WiMAX Location-Based Services	WIRELESS MESSAGING

This newsletter is brought to you by the generous support of our advertisers and the courtesy of iland Internet Solutions Corporation. For more information about the web-hosting services available from iland Internet Solutions Corporation, please click on their logo to the left.

There is no charge for subscription and there are no membership restrictions. Readers are a very select group of wireless industry professionals, and include the senior managers of many of the world's major Paging and Wireless Data companies. There is an even mix of operations managers, marketing people, and engineers — so I try to include items of interest to all three groups. It's all about staying up-to-date with business trends and technology. I regularly get readers' comments, so this newsletter has become a community forum for the Paging, and Wireless Data communities. You are welcome to contribute your ideas and opinions. Unless otherwise requested, all correspondence addressed to me is subject to publication in the newsletter and on my web site. I am very careful to protect the anonymity of those who request it.

Editorial Opinion pieces present the opinions of the author. They do not necessarily reflect the views of AAPC, its publisher, or its sponsors.

Brad Dye, Ron Mercer, Allan Angus, and Vic Jackson are friends and colleagues who work both together and independently, on wireline and wireless communications projects. Click here  for a summary of their qualifications and experience. They collaborate on consulting assignments, and share the work according to their individual expertise and their schedules.

If you would like to have information about advertising in this newsletter, please click here.

American Association of Paging Carriers

AAPC/EMMA Trading Post now active!

As many of you know, the inaugural Global Paging Convention was a tremendous success. Many ideas were generated from formal sessions as well as informal conversations. One idea was to create a database of equipment that our members either want to sell or are looking to buy.

We are pleased to announce the launch of the AAPC/EMMA Trading Post. To access the Trading Post you must be either a current member of AAPC or EMMA. The more members populate the trading post the more useful it will become, therefore please take a moment and input any “spare parts” that you may have and/or what you are in need of.

Log in to the members only area from the AAPC web site, www.pagingcarriers.org to view the Trading Post and follow the directions on how to input your information. Please note that initially everyone will need to register to use the Trading Post. Each member is responsible for contacting the listing person if you are interested in purchasing a particular item. AAPC will not be involved in any of the interactions completed, nor monitor what interactions are “in the works”. Our goal with the Trading Post is to expedite the exchange of equipment to continue to foster your business.

Not a member? Click here to become an AAPC member.

Thanks to our Gold Vendor!

Prism Paging

Thanks to our Silver Vendors!
Recurrent Software Solutions, Inc.	Unication USA

Thanks to our Bronze Vendors!

• Commtech Wireless
• Critical Response Systems, Inc.
• Hark Technologies
• Inilex
• ISC Technologies
• Microspace Communications Corporation
• Minilec Services, Inc.
• Multitone Electronics
• United Communications Corporation

Advertiser Index

Zetron's Paging and Remote Monitoring Solutions

The Model 640 DAPT-XTRA Paging Terminal is a cost effective solution for small to medium-sized systems and private organizations offering a paging service based on bureau-type operator paging and/or direct telephone access. The 640 supports up to 1,500 users with up to 4 telephone lines. It also supports voice paging, voice prompts, talkback paging, and alphanumeric paging.

Zetron's Remote Monitoring equipment provides monitoring and notification of unusual conditions and status changes. Messages are automatically transmitted over a radio or a public address system. Notification can be sent via speaker or radio announcement, telephone, cellular phone, or paging.

pcleavitt@leavittcom.com www.leavittcom.com (847) 955-0511

FCC still looking for broadband ideas

Sep 23, 2009 6:12 am
by Grant Gross, IDG News Service

The Federal Communications Commission is still looking for ideas on how to bring broadband to all corners of the U.S. and to increase subscriber numbers, said the director of the agency's broadband project.

The FCC is about midway through a year-long effort to create a national broadband plan, and Blair Levin, executive director of the FCC’s omnibus broadband initiative, said Tuesday he hopes he hasn't heard all the good ideas yet. “There’s a lot of capacity for us to hear your good ideas,” Levin said during a broadband policy discussion hosted by the Media and Democracy Coalition and OneWebDay.

Congress, in legislation passed early this year, required the FCC to create a national broadband plan, with a goal of providing universal broadband. Getting to universal broadband in the U.S. will take a coordinated effort by many groups, Levin said.

“It ain’t going to be done just at the FCC,” Levin said. “There’s no way in the world that those of us who are blessed to have the opportunity to work on this full time can actually answer the tough questions.”

Levin, speaking mainly to broadband activists, said it’s more important than ever to bring broadband to parts of the country that don’t have it. More than three quarters of U.S. companies now accept resumes only online, he said, and a recent survey found that 68 percent of high school students use the Internet as their primary tool for researching assignments.

“What does that mean for the kids who aren't online?” he asked. “How can they compete? The cost of digital exclusion is growing.”

The huge growth and success of the Internet creates some challenges, Levin added. Many new Internet users will access the Web through a wireless device, but that means the U.S. government needs to find additional wireless spectrum, he said. “We can have a fantastic plan for broadband in America in the year 2020, and if there’s not ... enough spectrum being utilized, it’s unlikely to be successful,” he added.

Wireless Internet has great potential, added Susannah Fox, associate director for digital strategy at the Pew Internet and American Life Project. In an April survey, Pew found that 56 percent of all U.S. adults had accessed the Internet through wireless devices, including laptops, smartphones and game consoles.

In a recent survey, Pew found that 63 percent of all U.S. adults had broadband in their homes, compared to just 46 percent of black adults. But the difference in the numbers disappeared when Pew looked at wireless Internet users, she said.

While some speakers at the event talked about ways to build broadband networks, Amalia Deloney, a broad member at the Media and Democracy Coalition, focused on Internet education. Many people still not connected to broadband haven’t learned basic computer skills, she said. Schools need to focus more on digital literacy, she added.

“It’s about knowing how to use a computer,” Deloney said. “It's about knowing how to use e-mail.”

Byte Back, a computer and job training facility in Washington, D.C., needs more volunteers to help homeless and low-income people learn to use computers and the Internet, added Kelley Ellsworth, the executive director there. Even after expanding twice in recent years, Byte Back still has a waiting list, she said.

“There are entire sections of this city that are on the other side of the digital divide,” she added.

Do you want to increase airtime revenue?

Resell PageRouter to increase traffic and sell more pagers

• Your customers install PageRouter in their location to send messages to your pagers from UNLIMITED network computers using a browser.
• Databases from 10 to 10,000 users.
• Your customers can quickly create or modify Groups based on their needs, anytime.

FailSafe
PageRouter with FailSafe provides dependable message delivery to your paging terminal by automatically switching between WCTP, SNPP and DIALUP TAP in case of unexpected server disconnections. Trust your internet connectivity to provide reliable paging service.

Page Alarm Messages
Send programmable canned messages when equipment or alarm relay contacts close, open or both. Program escalation, response delays and repeats. Trigger alarms from wireless buttons. Page alarm messages originated by Emergency Dispatch and CADs systems at 911, Police and Fire Departments. Extremely reliable!

Call us for Prices
We will provide a resale price that will include our online installation and product support to your customers. In our experience, when you facilitate entering messages from computers, volumes increase and customers ask for more pagers. Make money reselling PageRouter and increase your paging service revenue.

Canamex Communications Corporation Providing technology to the paging industry since 1989 800-387-4237 sales@canamexcom.com www.canamexcom.com

PAGING & WIRELESS
NETWORK PLANNERS LLC
WIRELESS SPECIALISTS

www.pagingplanners.com
rmercer@pagingplanners.com

R.H. (Ron) Mercer Consultant 217 First Street South East Northport, NY 11731
Cell Phone: 631-786-9359

Wireless Industry Management Specialist

• Nationwide Field Service Capability
• 24/7 Customer Service
• Collections
• Network Operations Center Functions
• Two Way Radio Network Provider
• Spectrum Sales & Acquisition

Contact:

Tom Williams 973-625-7500 x102
e-mail: twilliams@fleettalkusa.com

FleetTALK Management Services
101 Roundhill Drive
Rockaway, NJ 07866
973-625-7500

Senate Asks: Do Phones Cause Cancer?

September 21, 2009, 6:47 PM
By ROY FURCHGOTT
Gadgetwise—The New York Times

Last week’s Senate hearing on “The Health Effects of Cell Phone Use” reached no conclusion on whether cellphone use causes brain tumors, but it certainly rekindled the controversy.

Experts on the panel explained that the evidence is contradictory and that more study was needed. As though we needed experts to tell us that.

Not surprisingly, the C.T.I.A., the trade association for the wireless industry, issued a statement saying that “impartial groups such as the U. S. Food and Drug Administration, the World Health Organization, the American Cancer Society, and the National Institutes of Health,” have concluded that wireless phones are safe.

While legislators and scientists try to sort it out, you can take steps to lower your exposure to the radiation, however minimal it may be.

First, you can check to see how much radiation your phone emits. Those emissions are measured as Specific Absorption Rate, or SAR.

SAR is the amount of radio-frequency energy absorbed in the head of a wireless-handset user. The Federal Communications Commission’s limit is an SAR level of 1.6 watts per kilogram. (The F.C.C. uses a dummy head with synthetic tissue to test this.) Some phones do approach the limit, for instance the Motorola Motozine SAR is 1.59 W/kg. Toward the lower end of the scale is the Motorola Razr2 V9 with a SAR rating of 0.61 W/kg.

You can look up how much radiation your phone emits on an F.C.C. database. It requires some work. First, you have to find the device number of your phone, which starts with three numbers and a dash. You may have to remove the battery to find it. Then, with number in hand, go to the F.C.C. site, enter the number, and look up the SAR value.

Or you can try entering the model of phone you own and the word “SAR” in your favorite search engine.

Phones also kick out more radiation when they are struggling for a signal, so don’t make calls in subways and elevators.

The easiest way to get the radiation away from your head is to use a wired headphone. Of course, you could also just make fewer calls.

Before the
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20054

To: The Commission

COMMENTS OF THE
ENTERPRISE WIRELESS ALLIANCE

The Enterprise Wireless Alliance (“EWA” or the “Alliance”) submits these comments in response to the Public Notice issued by the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC” or “Commission”) seeking review of rules adopted by the Commission in 1998 which have, or might have, a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.¹ One set of rules under consideration in the Public Notice are those contained in Part 64, Subpart U, governing the proper use of and the duty of telecommunications carriers to protect the confidentiality of Customer Proprietary Network Information (“CPNI”).

As described in the Public Notice, the purpose of the FCC review process is “to determine whether such rules should be continued without change, or should be amended or rescinded, consistent with the stated objectives of section 610 of the R[egulatory] F[lexibility] A[ct] (“RFA”), to minimize any significant economic impact of such rules upon a substantial number of small entities.”² The Alliance believes that the current regulatory provisions governing CPNI have the type of adverse impact on certain small telecommunications carriers that the RFA is intended to prevent. EWA recommends that the FCC’s rules be revisited to address that impact, consistent with the CPNI obligations imposed by statute.³

EWA represents a broad alliance of business enterprise users, communications service providers, radio dealers and technology manufacturers, all of which use or provide wireless telecommunications products or services. Many of the Alliance’s members operate private radio systems used for internal communications. Such systems are not subject to the CPNI rules. However, a number of EWA’s members operate small commercial systems serving primarily the dispatch market, although some have limited interconnection capability as well. Since all such members are classified as telecommunications carriers⁴ pursuant to the Communications Act, this matter is of significant interest to the Alliance.

The Alliance participated in the recent rulemaking proceeding in which the FCC sought to enhance the protection of CPNI through a re-evaluation of its rules governing carrier obligations.⁵ In that proceeding, EWA urged the FCC to exempt from the CPNI obligations at least those telecommunications carriers whose systems are not interconnected with the Public Switched Network (“PSN”) and who, therefore, do not have access to the type of calling information the statute seeks to protect. It also recommended that the FCC apply the “covered carrier” definition to distinguish between telecommunications service providers with and without CPNI obligations.⁶ This definition has been used to differentiate consumer-oriented, two-way wireless services like cellular and PCS from the exclusively or primarily dispatch systems that serve very small numbers of business, industrial and governmental customers and that, even when interconnected with the PSN, do not assign individual telephone numbers to different customers, much less to individual customer radios. The Alliance also cautioned the FCC that operators of these types of systems had received inconsistent information from different members of the FCC’s staff about the applicability of CPNI obligations to their systems, which placed these licensees at risk of non-compliance and confirmed that clarification of the rules was necessary.

The Report and Order adopted by the FCC acknowledged EWA’s comments briefly in a footnote, but seemingly misconstrued the Alliance’s position.⁷ The R&O stated that the FCC disagreed with EWA and other commenters regarding the CPNI filing requirements, explaining that the Commission is concerned about the privacy of customers of small and regional carriers, not just large carriers, and asserting that the benefits of customer privacy protection significantly outweigh a carrier’s costs to implement CPNI rules.⁸

In fact, the distinction EWA had drawn was based on the type of service provided, the customer base to which it was provided and the type of communications transmitted. It typically is small carriers that operate these systems, but it was the characteristics of the systems, not their size, that EWA considered determinative. Because the Alliance believed that the FCC had failed to understand EWA’s position and, therefore, had not provided a meaningful response, the Alliance filed a Petition for Partial Reconsideration of the R&O on July 9, 2007.⁹ The Commission has not yet acted on that Petition.

EWA still believes that the CPNI obligations weigh heavily on carriers that offer exclusively or primarily dispatch service, all of which are small entities under the FRA. The Alliance again recommends that the FCC consider a less burdensome approach that is better tailored to the business realities of different categories of service providers. The Small Entity Compliance Guide to CPNI issued by the FCC on June 6, 2008 is 17 pages long and describes the complicated processes telecommunications carriers must follow to remain compliant with those rules, thereby demonstrating that meeting this obligation places a significant burden on those small entities.¹⁰

But if it does nothing else, the Alliance urges the Commission to issue a Public Notice that removes any doubt about whether telecommunications carriers that are not interconnected with the PSN at all and that do not have access to any type of customer calling records nonetheless are subject to the full panoply of CPNI obligations. EWA would hope that the Public Notice would exempt such carriers from the CPNI requirements. However, it at least would resolve the troubling problem that licensees have received diametrically different advice from FCC staff on this question, with some saying that the rules do not apply and others advising that they do.

That there is continued confusion about this issue is confirmed by the forfeiture order released by the FCC in February 2009 in which the Commission issued $20,000 forfeitures to hundreds of FCC licensees that the Commission believed had failed to timely file their 2007 CPNI certifications.¹¹ A substantial number of those licensees are dispatch operators providing non-interconnected two-way radio service to business, industrial and governmental customers using Part 90 spectrum. A number of them contacted EWA after receiving the Forfeiture Notice to explain either that they had no idea that they could be subject to CPNI rules since their systems were not interconnected or, in a not insignificant number of cases, that they had contacted the FCC, often through its Help Desk, and had been specifically advised that the CPNI rules did not apply to systems that did not provide access to the PSN.

There is no question that the Forfeiture Order had a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. A fine of $20,000 for companies of this size would be a significant burden at any time. It is devastating in this economic climate. EWA is aware that a number of affected licensees incurred the cost of filing Petitions for Reconsideration of the Forfeiture Order, often requiring the assistance of FCC counsel to do so. In response to those filings, in some number of instances, the FCC has concluded that the carrier’s certification had been timely filed and has canceled the forfeiture.¹² In other cases, the Commission has acknowledged that the entity had no CPNI obligations and has canceled the forfeiture accordingly.¹³ The Alliance also has noted a number of recent Consent Decrees between the FCC and entities subject to the Forfeiture Order in which the fines were reduced very significantly.¹⁴

The Alliance knows nothing about the particular facts of those situations, although it certainly is appropriate that the fines were canceled upon a demonstration that the CPNI filing had been properly and timely submitted or was not required at all. EWA also does not question whether a Consent Decree was an appropriate vehicle for resolving this issue in other instances. However, the process, whether filing to seek reversal of the FCC’s forfeiture assessments or pursuing the negotiation and implementation of a Consent Decree, involves not insignificant costs for the affected entities, the great majority of which appear to be small entities as classified by the RFA, and consumes FCC resources as well.

Any regulatory obligation that produces a scale of non-compliance such as first was suggested by the number of entities involved in the Forfeiture Order demands closer scrutiny. In EWA’s opinion, the CPNI rules should be re-examined and modified to exempt at least those telecommunications carriers whose systems are not interconnected with the PSN and, preferably, those whose systems do not assign individual telephone numbers to customers with ancillary interconnect capability. At a minimum, the Commission should issue a Public Notice clarifying the issue of non-interconnected carriers and their CPNI obligations and thereby eliminate any future confusion about the status of such systems vis-à-vis the CPNI rules.

	Respectfully submitted,
	ENTERPRISE WIRELESS ALLIANCE
	By:                   /s/
	Mark Crosby
	President/CEO
	8484 Westpark Drive, Suite 630
	McLean, Virginia 22102
	(703) 528-5115

¹ Public Notice, FCC Seeks Comment Regarding Possible Revision or Elimination of Rules Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C., 24 FCC Rcd 7975 (rel. June 24, 2009) (“Public Notice”).

² Id. at 1.

³ Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56 (codified at 47 U.S.C. §§ 151 et seq.), 47 U.S.C. § 222.

⁴ Both the Communications Act and the corresponding Commission rules governing CPNI specify that the regulations apply to “telecommunications carriers.” The term “telecommunications carrier” is defined in the Communications Act as any provider that offers telecommunications services for a fee directly to the public or to such classes of users as to be effectively available directly to the public, regardless of the facilities used. The term has been interpreted by the FCC to include carriers that are not interconnected with the telephone network and even entities that hold no FCC licenses, but simply operate the telecommunications facilities for which users hold the licenses.

⁵ Implementation of the Telecommunications Act of 1996: Telecommunications Carriers’ Use of Customer Proprietary Network Information and other Customer Information, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, CC Docket No. 96-115, 21 FCC Rcd 1782 (2006).

⁶ Telephone Number Portability, Second Memorandum Opinion & Order on Reconsideration, CC Docket No. 95-116, 13 FCC Rcd 21204, 21229 (1998).

⁷ Implementation of the Telecommunications Act of 1996: Telecommunications Carriers’ Use of Customer Proprietary Network Information and other Customer Information, Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, CC Docket No. 96-115, 22 FCC Rcd 6928 ( 2007) (“R&O”).

⁸ R&O at n.167.

⁹ Public Notice, Petition for Reconsideration of Action in Rulemaking Proceeding, Report No. 2821 (rel. July 20, 2007).

¹⁰ Small Entity Compliance Guide – Customer Proprietary Network Information (CPNI), DA 08-1321 (rel. June 6, 2008).

¹¹ In the Matter of Annual CPNI Certification, Omnibus Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 24 FCC Rcd 2299 (2009) (“Forfeiture Notice”). This very substantial forfeiture was assessed based entirely on an alleged failure to submit a CPNI certification by the FCC deadline and not on any finding that the parties had actually failed to protect CPNI.

¹² See, e.g, Allendale Telephone Company d/b/a Allendale Communications Company, Order, DA 09-1931 (rel. Aug. 31, 2009).

¹³ See, e.g., Visionary Communications, Inc., Order, DA 09-1889 (rel. Sept. 1, 2009).

¹⁴ See, e.g., Ligtel Communications, Inc., Order, DA 09-1606 (rel. Aug. 3, 2009).

Iridium Satellite deal will boost Phoenix-area partners

Thursday, September 24, 2009, 10:06am MST
Phoenix Business Journal - by Patrick O'Grady

A decade after it sought bankruptcy protection, Iridium Satellite LLC is on the verge of becoming the next big public option in satellite communications -- and, in the process, benefiting other local companies.

The company will go public Sept. 29 through a merger with publicly traded GHL Acquisition Corp., a venture formed by New York-based investment banking firm Greenhill & Co. to buy private businesses. GHL shareholders approved the deal Wednesday.

Iridium, formed by Motorola Inc. and later spun off, has seen a resurgence in the use of its communications system. Officials have been looking for funding to launch the company’s upgraded network of 66 satellites.

Iridium is based in Bethesda, Md., but maintains its business operations in Tempe, employing about 200 workers through its connections with Boeing Co., which controls the satellite network, and another group at a facility in the Arizona State University Research Park.

The merger is “really a huge milestone for the company,” Iridium CEO Matt Desch said Wednesday evening after the vote had been tallied.

The merger is expected to add more than $200 million in capital to Iridium’s coffers, which will enable the company to pay down debt and develop its new constellation of satellites for launch in 2014. Along with the merger, the company issued an additional 16 million shares at the $10 price, netting it $160 million at least.

“It’s a significant infusion into the company,” Desch said.

Once merged with GHL (ASE:GHQ) since its initial public offering in 2008, the company will be called Iridium Communications Inc. and be traded on the Nasdaq under the symbol IRDM. The company already was trading under that symbol Thursday morning at about $10 a share.

The move caps a long journey for Iridium from the ashes of Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 1999. Motorola launched the satellite system in 1997 and 1998 with an eye toward providing communications anywhere on the globe.

The project was far from a success, reporting $6 billion in losses, including a $3.5 billion hit for Motorola. The company sold Iridium in 2000 for $25 million to a group led by Dan Colussy, a former president of Pan American World Airways as well as president and CEO of Canadian Pacific Air Lines Ltd. and aerospace company UNC Inc.

Since relaunching its network in 2001, the company has built its customer base to 347,000. It raked in $82.7 million in revenue in the second quarter of 2009, according to information from Iridium.

Tempe-based KinetX Inc., one of Iridium’s largest contractors, specializes in communications, spacecraft payload design and orbital operations. It is helping to develop the Iridium Next generation of satellites, and if that $2.7 billion program moves forward, KinetX could benefit through design and mission segments.

Lockheed Martin Corp. and Thales Alenia Space are competing for the contract to build replacement satellites for the current constellation of 66, plus several more, for Iridium Next. The current plan is to launch the new satellites in 2014, and Desch said the company is at most three to four months away from selecting a contractor.

KinetX also was a contractor on ground control systems and the satellite constellation when Iridium was originally launched, and it has ties to the program going back to the company’s inception in 1993.

The merger “gives them a whole bunch of liquidity,” said Glenn Williamson, CEO of Nest Ventures LLC and chairman of KinetX.

The deal affects more than 200 Iridium partners that supply components and operations for the satellites, Desch said. It also affects the U.S. military and other organizations that use the phones.

“There’s a whole ecosystem of partners that are important to Iridium,” he said.

Gina Martinez, general manager of Chandler-based World Communications Center, which specializes in sales and renting of Iridium phones, said the merger is a positive move for the network and her company.

“I think it’s going to help us in getting the name out there for people who will rent or buy the phones,” she said.

Iridium offers one of several satellite phone options. When the system launched, its adoption rate wasn't good because most people were migrating to land-based cellular services. There still is a need for satellite communications, particularly for maritime and military uses, and for travel to parts of the globe not served by cell sites, Martinez said.

“There’s plenty of places where there’s no cellular service and no land lines,” she said.

Although rates have come down from the $8- to $9-a-minute level when the system launched, satellite communications still are a bit pricey at $1.25 to $1.75 a minute. For customers who use it, from emergency first-responders to oil-rig workers, the need for connection is great, Martinez said.`

www.daviscommsusa.com

Br502 Numeric VHF/UHF-900 MHz FLEX

Bravo Pagers FLEX & POCSAG

Br802 Alphanumeric VHF/UHF-900 MHz FLEX

With or Without Housing With or Without BNC Connector

For information call 480-515-2344 or visit our website
www.daviscommsusa.com

Addison County Man, Member of WCAX Family Killed in Plane Crash

Hilltop Lakes, Texas - September 24, 2009

A fiery plane crash in Texas claimed the life of a man from Addison County, who's a member of the Channel 3 family.

Paul Valois of Panton was attempting to land his single-engine Cessna Wednesday night at Hilltop Lakes Airport in Leon County when the plane clipped a tree, slammed into a home and burst into flames.

Valois' friend, John Neukom, was on the ground waiting for him to land.

"It was fully engulfed at that point and I broke down the door and tried to go in and just couldn't do it. I was just worried about trying to get Paul out and there just wasn't any getting him," Neukom said.

Valois died at the scene.

No one was inside the home at the time of the crash.

The landing lights at the private runway were not working last night. The FAA is investigating.

Paul Valois owned Contact Messaging and Paging based in Burlington. Paul was also the partner of Judi Fisher, our Local Sales Manager here at WCAX. Paul and Judi had planned on retiring to Hilltop Lakes.

Source: WCAX.com

Video of Television Report here.

Audio Recording of NTSB Interview here.

INSIDE THIS ISSUE

• Genachowski unveils plan for network neutrality.
• FCC grants waiver of quarterly tower lighting inspections where certain automatic monitors were used.
• Comment sought on broadband accessibility for people with disabilities work-shop II.
• FCC debunks cell phone directory rumor.
• Only McDowell, Baker take stand on handset exclusivity.

Genachowski Unveils Plan For Network Neutrality

In a speech to the Brookings Institution on Monday, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski proposed his “open Inter-net guidelines” by expanding and codifying the Commission’s September 2005 broadband Internet Policy Statement. The Chairman would add a “non-discrimination” principle and a “transparency” principle to the four exist-ing principles:

• To encourage broadband deployment and preserve and promote the open and interconnected nature of the public Internet, consumers are entitled to access the lawful Internet content of their choice.
• To encourage broadband deployment and preserve and promote the open and interconnected nature of the public Internet, consumers are entitled to run applications and use services of their choice, subject to the needs of law enforcement.
• To encourage broadband deployment and preserve and promote the open and interconnected nature of the public Internet, consumers are entitled to connect their choice of legal devices that do not harm the net-work.
• To encourage broadband deployment and preserve and promote the open and interconnected nature of the public Internet, consumers are entitled to competition among network providers, application and service providers, and content providers.

Under the principle of non-discrimination, broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications. This means they cannot block or degrade lawful traffic over their networks, or pick winners by favoring some content or applications over others in the connection to subscribers’ homes. Nor can they dis-favor an Internet service just because it competes with a similar service offered by that broadband provider. The Internet must continue to allow users to decide what con-tent and applications succeed.

According to Genachowski, this principle will not prevent broadband providers from reasonably managing their networks. During periods of network congestion, for example, it may be appropriate for providers to ensure that very heavy users do not crowd out everyone else. And this principle will not constrain efforts to ensure a safe, secure, and spam-free Internet experience, or to enforce the law. It is vital that illegal conduct be curtailed on the Internet.

“As I said in my Senate confirmation hearing, open Internet principles apply only to lawful content, services and applications — not to activities like unlawful distribution of copyrighted works, which has serious economic consequences. The enforcement of copyright and other laws and the obligations of network openness can and must co-exist,” Genachowski said. “I also recognize that there may be benefits to innovation and investment of broad-band providers offering managed services in limited circumstances. These services are different than traditional broadband Internet access, and some have argued they should be analyzed under a different framework. I believe such services can supplement — but must not supplant — free and open Internet access, and that we must ensure that ample bandwidth exists for all Internet users and innovators.”

The transparency principle states that providers of broadband Internet access must be transparent about their network management practices. The Internet evolved through open standards, the Chairman said. It was conceived as a tool whose user manual would be free and available to all. But new network management practices and technologies challenge this original understanding. Today, broadband providers have the technical ability to change how the Internet works for millions of users — with profound consequences for those users and content, application, and service providers around the world.

To be clear, Genachowski said, the transparency principle will not require broadband providers to disclose personal information about subscribers or information that might compromise the security of the network, and there will be a mechanism to protect competitively sensitive data. In considering the openness of the Internet, it is also important to recognize that our choice of technologies and devices for accessing the Internet continues to expand at a dizzying pace, the Chairman said. New mobile and satellite broadband networks are getting faster every day, and extraordinary devices like smart phones and wireless data cards are making it easier to stay connected while on the go. And he noted the beginnings of a trend towards openness among several participants in the mobile marketplace.

Even though each form of Internet access has unique technical characteristics, they are all are different roads to the same place, Genachowski continued. “It is essential that the Internet itself remain open, however users reach it. The principles I’ve been speaking about apply to the Internet however accessed, and I will ask my fellow Commissioners to join me in confirming this,” he said. Of course, how the principles apply may differ depending on the access platform or technology.

“The rulemaking process will enable the Commission to analyze fully the implications of the principles for mobile network architectures and practices — and how, as a practical matter, they can be fairly and appropriately implemented,” Genachowski said. “As we tackle these complex questions involving different technologies used for Internet access, let me be clear that we will be focused on formulating policies that will maximize innovation and investment, consumer choice, and greater competition.”

The Chairman intends to propose adopting all six principles as rules, and the Commission plans to consider the item as a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) at its October open meeting. Both Commissioner Michael Copps and Mignon Clyburn issued statements in support of Genachowski’s remarks.

In a joint statement, Republican Commissioners Robert McDowell and Meredith Attwell Baker said: “We hope that all of the stakeholders affected by the Chairman’s proposed endeavor have sufficient time to investigate the facts thoroughly and deliberate openly before the Commission acts to codify more government involvement in the Internet space. Although we have not been given any draft or summary of proposed net neutrality rules, it is clear from the Chairman’s statements that they will be monumental in their scope. In the meantime, we are concerned that both factual and legal conclusions may have been drawn before the process has begun. None-the-less, we look forward to reviewing any and all compelling evidence that may be developed in the record that illustrates the palpable harms that many allege. We do not believe that the Commission should adopt regulations based merely on anecdotes, or in an effort to alleviate the political pressures of the day, if the facts do not clearly demonstrate that a problem needs to be remedied.”

BloostonLaw contacts: Ben Dickens, Gerry Duffy, and Mary Sisak.

FCC GRANTS WAIVER OF QUARTERLY TOWER LIGHTING INSPECTIONS WHERE CERTAIN AUTOMATIC MONITORS WERE USED: The FCC has granted the requests of TowerSentry LLC and joint petitioners Diamond Communications LLC and Diamond Towers LLC (“Diamond”) for waiver of the requirement that the owner of any antenna structure that is registered with the Commission and has been assigned lighting specifications shall perform quarterly inspections of “all automatic or mechanical control devices, indicators, and alarm systems associated with the antenna structure lighting to insure that such apparatus is functioning properly.” The waiver was granted based on the use of advanced automatic light monitoring technology. If you believe that your tower would qualify for such waiver, you must file your own waiver request. The waiver granted by the FCC applies only to TowerSentry and Diamond.

TowerSentry is an independent tower light monitoring company that monitors 610 antenna structures and other towers throughout the United States on behalf of a variety of clients. Diamond owns 150 antenna structures subject to the quarterly inspection requirement that are monitored by TowerSentry.

Both TowerSentry and Diamond argue that the quarterly inspections of antenna monitoring systems mandated by Section 17.47(b) of the Commission’s Rules have been rendered unnecessary because of technological advancements associated with the particular monitoring systems that they employ — the TowerSentry Monitoring Systems (TSMS). TowerSentry and Diamond ask the Commission to waive the rule and instead permit annual inspections of all of the antenna structures monitored with these systems. The FCC granted Diamond its request for relief. In addition, while the FCC did not grant TowerSentry a waiver on behalf of its clients, it did establish an expedited process by which other users of the TSMS may request and obtain waivers of their obligation to perform quarterly inspections under Section17.47(b).

The FCC concluded that the TowerSentry Waiver Request and the Diamond Waiver Request establish that quarterly inspections are unnecessary for those towers monitored by the TSMS. The Airspace and Rules Group of the Federal Aviation Administration has stated that it is not opposed to waivers of Section 17.47(b) “provided the applicant can demonstrate a safe and reliable automatic monitoring system with tracking mechanisms to evaluate the remote monitoring technology.”

The FCC concluded that TowerSentry is operating a safe and reliable monitoring system with tracking mechanisms to evaluate the remote monitoring technology, and that features of this system provide sufficiently robust monitoring of the control devices, indicators and alarm systems so as to render quarterly inspections unnecessary. Indeed, such advanced technology provides the benefits of more rapid response where there has been a lighting failure, and thus the public interest is served with respect to aircraft safety. In addition, granting waivers to tower owners using the TowerSentry Monitoring System will save them hundreds of thousands of dollars annually that are unnecessarily spent on quarterly inspections where they have deployed this advanced technology.

Specifically, any waiver applicant shall submit a certification that: (1) its towers are monitored by the TowerSentry Monitoring Systems under the process described in this order; and (2) it maintains a facility to receive notifications of failures from TowerSentry, which will enable the tower owner to carry out its responsibilities under Part 17 of the Commission’s rules. The certification shall be signed, under penalty of perjury, by a company officer (or partner, sole proprietor or similar person able to act on behalf of the tower owner) with knowledge of the underlying facts. Clients that would like our assistance in filing such waiver requests should contact us promptly. BloostonLaw contacts: Hal Mordkofsky, John Prendergast, and Richard Rubino.

COMMENT SOUGHT ON BROADBAND ACCESSIBILITY FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES WORKSHOP II: In the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), Congress directed the Commission to create a National Broadband Plan by February 17, 2010, that will ensure that all people of the United States have access to broadband capability. Among other things, the Commission is to provide “an analysis of the most effective and efficient mechanism for ensuring broadband access by all people of the United States;” “a detailed strategy for achieving affordability of such service and maximum utilization of broadband infrastructure and service by the public;” an evaluation of “the status of deployment of broadband service;” and “a plan for use of broadband infrastructure and services in advancing . . . national purposes,” including those related to health care, education, public safety and homeland security, job creation/worker training, and civic participation/community development. Issues related to providing broadband access to people with disabilities are an integral part of the National Broadband Plan. To build on the record from the Notice of Inquiry (NOI) and the first workshop on “Disabilities Opportunities” held on August 20, 2009, the FCC has scheduled a second workshop titled “Broadband Accessibility for People with Disabilities: Barriers, Opportunities, and Policy Recommendations.” This full-day workshop will be held on October 20, 2009. The goal of this follow-up workshop is to identify and record with specificity: (i) accessibility and affordability barriers faced by people with disabilities in accessing broadband capabilities; (ii) opportunities that broadband can present for people with disabilities; and (iii) policy recommendations to address the barriers to broadband for people with disabilities and maximize the opportunities related to broadband for people with disabilities. Comments in this GN Docket Nos. 09-47, 09-51, and 09-137 proceeding are due October 6. Filings should be referenced as: “Comments—NBP Public Notice # 4.” BloostonLaw contacts: Ben Dickens, Gerry Duffy, John Prendergast, Mary Sisak, and Cary Mitchell.

FCC DEBUNKS CELL PHONE DIRECTORY RUMOR: For several years there has been a rumor circulating, mostly by e-mail, that a nationwide directory of cell phone numbers will be made available to telemarketers, and that consumers will start receiving telemarketing calls on their cell phones, the FCC stated in a news release. “There is no truth to this rumor. Cell phone numbers are not being released to telemarketers, and you will not soon be getting telemarketing calls on your cell phone,” the FCC emphasized. FCC rules prohibit the use of autodialers and prerecorded messages to call cell phones without the consumer’s consent. Thus, most telemarketers are barred from contacting consumers on their cell phones. The Commission says the e-mail spreading the rumor often suggests that consumers put their cell phone numbers on the National Do-Not-Call Registry by going on-line at www.donotcall.gov or by calling 1-888-382-1222. This is the correct contact information for the National Do-Not-Call Registry. Consumers may register their cell phone numbers as an extra protection against unwanted telemarketing calls, the FCC said, although most telemarketing calls to cell phones would be illegal regardless of whether the number is listed on the Do-Not-Call Registry. BloostonLaw contacts: Hal Mordkofsky, John Prendergast, Cary Mitchell, and Bob Jackson.

McDOWELL, BAKER TAKE STAND ON HANDSET EXCLUSIVITY: Both Republican FCC Commissioners, Robert McDowell and Meredith Attwell Baker, told the House Subcommittee on Communications last week that exclusive deals between mobile phone makers and carriers could harm consumers in rural markets. But the FCC Democrats, Chairman Julius Genachowski and Commissioners Michael Copps and Mignon Clyburn declined to take a position on the issue in response to a “yes-or-no” question. Tier 1 wireless carriers, most notably Verizon Wireless and AT&T Mobility, have said the exclusive handset deals help spur innovation. Smaller regional carriers argue the deals limit industry competition by preventing them from offering the industry's hottest handsets. Genachowski has not indicated how long the FCC’s investigation will last. "I don't want to prejudge it," he said in an interview with Reuters in July. "This is the kind of thing that an expert agency should look at based on facts, based on data." BloostonLaw contacts: Hal Mordkofsky, John Prendergast, and Cary Mitchell.

IOWA UTILITIES BOARD RULES IN “TRAFFIC PUMPING” CASE: In a “traffic pumping” complaint brought by Qwest against several local exchange carriers (LECs), the Iowa Utilities Board has ruled that the intrastate, interexchange calls to the conference calling companies were not subject to access charges. The Board ordered refunds and credits to the interexchange carriers (IXCs). The Board also announced that it is initiating a proceeding to consider proposed rules intended “to prevent this abuse in the future.” This case stems from a formal complaint that Qwest filed against eight LECs alleging that they engaged in a deliberate plan to deliberately increase the amount of terminating access traffic delivered to their exchanges via agreements with their conference calling companies, according to the Iowa Board. Qwest alleged that the LECs attempted to manipulate the access charge regulatory system to collect millions of dollars from IXCs at rates that far exceeded the cost of providing switched access services. They started with access rates that were indirectly based on their cost of providing low volumes of access services, then entered into agreements with free conference calling companies that were allegedly intended to increase traffic volumes by 10,000% or more at the same rates, when the total cost of providing access service had not increased significantly, according to the Iowa Board. Thus, the Board found that the LECs failed to comply with their own intrastate access tariffs, so the calls in question were not subject to access charges and refunds and credits are required. The conference calling companies were not “end users” as defined in the access tariffs because they did not order, purchase, get billed for, or pay for local exchange service, according to the Iowa Board. Calls to the conference bridges were not terminated at the end user’s premises, as required by the tariff. And the Board said that many of the calls were laundered in an attempt to make it appear they were terminated in one LEC’s exchange, when in fact, they were terminated in another exchange where the LEC was not authorized to provide service. The Board also said that when Qwest filed its complaints with the Board and the FCC, some of the LECs attempted to manufacture evidence to make it appear that they had complied with their tariffs when they did not. BloostonLaw contacts: Ben Dickens, Gerry Duffy, and Mary Sisak.

FCC Sets Procedures For Licensees In Wildfire Areas

The FCC’s Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau and the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau have announced procedures to help public safety, private and commercial wireless licensees maintain or resume operations in the event their facilities are threatened or compromised by the California wildfires. For additional information, licensees should contact the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau or Wireless Telecommunications Bureau staff listed below.

Special Temporary Authority: Emergency requests for special temporary authority (STA) prompted by the effects of the wildfires and filed pursuant to Section 1.931 of the Commission’s rules may be submitted by informal letter or email or, if necessary, by telephone. Licensees may file requests electronically through the Universal Licensing System (ULS). All requests should provide the technical parameters of the proposed operation and a contact point. Clients needing STA should contact us as soon as possible.

Sections 22.307 (certain CMRS), 90.407 (private radio), and 101.205 (microwave) of the Commission’s rules address operation during periods of emergency for licensees authorized under these rule parts. These rules allow licensees to provide emergency communications during a period of emergency in a manner or configuration not specified in the station authorization or in the rules governing such stations. In most instances, operation in dire emergencies is allowed without prior approval if done in accordance with the rule, to be followed by a request for STA or other appropriate filings immediately thereafter.

BloostonLaw contacts: Hal Mordkofsky, John Prendergast, Richard Rubino, and Cary Mitchell.

FCC Grants Waiver Of Quarterly Tower Lighting Inspections Where Certain Automatic Monitors Were Used

The FCC has granted the requests of TowerSentry LLC and joint petitioners Diamond Communications LLC and Diamond Towers LLC (“Diamond”) for waiver of the requirement that the owner of any antenna structure that is registered with the Commission and has been assigned lighting specifications shall perform quarterly inspections of “all automatic or mechanical control devices, indicators, and alarm systems associated with the antenna structure lighting to insure that such apparatus is functioning properly.” The waiver was granted based on the use of advanced automatic light monitoring technology. If you believe that your tower would qualify for such waiver, you must file your own waiver request. The waiver granted by the FCC applies only to TowerSentry and Diamond.

TowerSentry is an independent tower light monitoring company that monitors 610 antenna structures and other towers throughout the United States on behalf of a variety of clients. Diamond owns 150 antenna structures subject to the quarterly inspection requirement that are monitored by TowerSentry.

Both TowerSentry and Diamond argue that the quarterly inspections of antenna monitoring systems mandated by Section 17.47(b) of the Commission’s Rules have been rendered unnecessary because of technological advancements associated with the particular monitoring systems that they employ—the TowerSentry Monitoring Systems (TSMS). TowerSentry and Diamond ask the Commission to waive the rule and instead permit annual inspections of all of the antenna structures monitored with these systems.

The FCC granted Diamond its request for relief. In addition, while the FCC did not grant TowerSentry a waiver on behalf of its clients, it did establish an expedited process by which other users of the TSMS may request and obtain waivers of their obligation to perform quarterly inspections under Section17.47(b).

The FCC concluded that the TowerSentry Waiver Request and the Diamond Waiver Request establish that quarterly inspections are unnecessary for those towers monitored by the TSMS. The Airspace and Rules Group of the Federal Aviation Administration has stated that it is not opposed to waivers of Section 17.47(b) “provided the applicant can demonstrate a safe and reliable automatic monitoring system with tracking mechanisms to evaluate the remote monitoring technology.”

The FCC concluded that TowerSentry is operating a safe and reliable monitoring system with tracking mechanisms to evaluate the remote monitoring technology, and that features of this system provide sufficiently robust monitoring of the control devices, indicators and alarm system's so as to render quarterly inspections unnecessary. Indeed, such advanced technology provides the benefits of more rapid response where there has been a lighting failure, and thus the public interest is served with respect to aircraft safety. In addition, granting waivers to tower owners using the TowerSentry Monitoring System will save them hundreds of thousands of dollars annually that are unnecessarily spent on quarterly inspections where they have deployed this advanced technology.

Specifically, any waiver applicant shall submit a certification that: (1) its towers are monitored by the TowerSentry Monitoring Systems under the process described in this order; and (2) it maintains a facility to receive notifications of failures from TowerSentry, which will enable the tower owner to carry out its responsibilities under Part 17 of the Commission’s rules. The certification shall be signed, under penalty of perjury, by a company officer (or partner, sole proprietor or similar person able to act on behalf of the tower owner) with knowledge of the underlying facts. Clients that would like our assistance in filing such waiver requests should contact us promptly.

BloostonLaw contacts: Hal Mordkofsky, John Prendergast, and Richard Rubino.

FCC Resolves ESV Issues In Reconsideration Order

In an Order on Reconsideration, the FCC considered four petitions seeking reconsideration and/or clarification of the Commission’s 2005 Report and Order (ESV Order) in which it adopted licensing and service rules for earth stations on vessels (ESVs) operating in the 5925-6425 MHz/3700-4200 MHz band (C-band) and the 14.0-14.5 GHz/11.7-12.2 GHz band (Ku-band). ESVs are mobile transmitters that facilitate communications services, including broadband services and internet access, to cruise ships, merchant ships, ferries, yachts, U.S. navy vessels, and certain other maritime vessels that carry a stabilized satellite dish.

In acting upon these petitions – filed by ARINC Incorporated (ARINC), the Boeing Company (Boeing), the Fixed Wireless Communications Coalition (FWCC) and Maritime Telecommunications Network (MTN)—the FCC resolved various concerns raised regarding the operational restrictions placed on ESVs that are designed to protect the fixed-satellite service (FSS), operating in the C-band and Ku-band, and the terrestrially-based fixed service (FS), operating in the C-band, from harmful interference. The revisions adopted by the FCC will provide ESV operators with greater operational flexibility while continuing to ensure that the other services in these bands are protected from harmful interference.

More specifically, in the Order on Reconsideration, the FCC modified certain ESV rules for protecting FSS operations to provide operational flexibility to ESV providers while ensuring that the FSS operators are protected from harmful interference in the C- and Ku-bands. In addition, in the C-band, the Commission clarified the ESV requirement to protect offshore FS and clarified the Public Notice requirement related to the completion of ESV coordination with the FS at a particular location. Further, the FCC declined to review some of the FWCC’s issues raised in its petition because the FWCC failed to raise new facts or identify any material errors or omissions in the ESV Order. To further ensure flexibility in the Ku-band, the FCC shortened the distance from the U.S. coastline that triggers compliance with a bilateral agreement or ITU RR 4.4 by ESVs on foreign-registered vessels that operate with non-U.S. hubs.

BloostonLaw contacts: Hal Mordkofsky, John Prendergast, and Richard Rubino.

Maryland Correctional Unit Gets Experimental License

The FCC’s Office of Engineering and Technology has granted a two-day experimental license to Tecore Networks. This license allows Tecore to participate in a demonstration organized by the Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services to understand alternatives to call-jamming that may be used to manage the use of cell phones in prisons.

The Tecore system is designed to terminate unauthorized cell phone calls made from within a prison, while allowing authorized cell phone calls—including all calls to 911—to be connected through the wireless carrier as usual. In contrast to previous proposals for testing cell-jamming technologies, Tecore has worked with the Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services to establish test conditions that ensure against any interference or disruption of cell phone calls that are not part of the demonstration. Access to the test area at the prison will be controlled, and Tecore has submitted a letter signed by all of the affected wireless carriers consenting to the test.

The initial demonstration was scheduled to be conducted on September 3, 2009, at the State Correctional Facility in Jessup, Maryland In addition to the demonstration of the Tecore technology, several vendors plan to demonstrate technologies that are designed to passively locate cell phones.

BloostonLaw contacts: Hal Mordkofsky, John Prendergast, and Cary Mitchell.

FCC Refuses to Reinstate Licenses that were Accidentally Cancelled by Licensee

The FCC has dismissed as untimely a petition filed by Lodi Truck Service, Inc., requesting reconsideration of the cancellation of licenses for two industrial/business pool microwave stations operating under WEH205 and WGY470 in Modesto and Vacaville, Calif.

On January 30, 2008, Lodi Truck Service filed applications requesting cancellation of the licenses for its Stations. The next day, the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau granted the requested cancellations and sent confirmation to Lodi Truck Service. The Bureau gave public notice of the cancellations on February 6, 2008. On March 10, 2008, the Bureau received Lodi Truck Service’s Petition.

Section 405(a) of the Communications Act, as implemented by Section 1.106(f) of the Commission’s Rules, requires that a petition for reconsideration and any supplements thereto be filed within thirty days from the date of public notice of Commission action. Computation of the thirty-day period is determined in accordance with Section 1.4 of the Commission’s Rules. Since public notice of the license cancellations was given on February 6, 2008, pursuant to Section 1.4(b)(4) of the Commission's’s Rules, the first day to be counted in computing the thirty-day period was February 7, 2008. The last day for filing a petition for reconsideration and any supplement was March 7, 2008.

The FCC received Lodi Truck Service’s Petition on March 10, 2008. Therefore, the FCC found that the Petition was late-filed. Moreover, the Commission has consistently held that it is without authority to extend or waive the statutory thirty-day filing period for filing petitions for reconsideration specified in Section 405(a) of the Communications Act. Consequently, the FCC said it must dismiss Lodi Truck Service’s Petition and Supplement as untimely filed.

BloostonLaw contacts: Hal Mordkofsky, John Prendergast, and Richard Rubino.

Costco, Wal-Mart Receive Illegal Marketing Citations

The FCC has issued official Citations to Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., and Costco Warehouse Corp., respectively, for marketing non-compliant radio frequency devices, specifically, the Astak CM-918T2 wireless security camera in the United States in violation of Commission rules and the Communications Act. The Commission noted that future violations in this regard may subject the companies to monetary forfeitures.

The FCC said that the Enforcement Bureau had received complaints alleging that the Astak CM-918T2 was causing harmful interference to Sprint Nextel’s licensed operation of its iDEN network in the 800 MHz and 900 MHz bands and that Costco and Wal-Mart were marketing this device. Staff from the Enforcement Bureau’s Spectrum Enforcement Division visited the store locations, tested the products, and determined that the Astak did not comply with the emission limits.

Intentional radiators, such as the transmitter component of the Astak CM-918T2 wireless security camera, are generally required by Section 15.201 of the Rules, to be approved through the equipment certification procedures described in Sections 2.1031—2.1060 of the Rules prior to marketing within the United States. As an intentional radiator operating at 905 MHz and 924 MHz, the Astak CM-918T2 is also subject to the radiated emission limits specified in Section 15.249(a) of the Rules for operations within the 902-928 MHz band.

In addition, pursuant to Section 15.249(d) of the Rules, except for harmonics, emissions from the Astak CM-918T2 radiated outside the 902-928 MHz band must be attenuated by at least 50 dB below the level of the fundamental frequency or to the general radiated emission limits specified in Section 15.209 of the Rules, whichever is the lesser attenuation. The OET Laboratory’s tests demonstrate that radiated emissions from the Astak CM-918T2 outside the 902-928 MHz band substantially exceed the limits specified in Section 15.209 of the Rules. Therefore, the Astak CM-918T2 does not comply with the radiated emission limits specified in Sections 15.249(d) and 15.209 of the Rules.

Accordingly, it appears that Costco and Wal-Mart violated Section 302(b) of the Act and Sections 2.803, 15.209 and 15.249(d) of the Rules by marketing in the United States the Astak CM-918T2 wireless security camera.

Costco and Wal-Mart have 30 days to respond to the citations. They are subject to $16,000 in fines if they subsequently violate the FCC’s rules.

BloostonLaw contacts: Hal Mordkofsky, John Prendergast, and Richard Rubino.

This newsletter is not intended to provide legal advice. Those interested in more information should contact the firm.

Source: Blooston, Mordkofsky, Dickens, Duffy and Prendergast, LLP For additional information, contact Hal Mordkofsky at 202-828-5520 or halmor@bloostonlaw.com

NEWS FLASH — SATELLITE FAILURES

• January 11, 1997—Telstar 401 suffers a short in the satellite circuitry—TOTAL LOSS May 19, 1998—Galaxy 4 control processor causes loss of fixed orbit—TOTAL LOSS September 19, 2003—Telstar 4 suffers loss of its primary power bus—TOTAL LOSS March 17, 2004—PAS-6 suffers loss of power—TOTAL LOSS
• January 14, 2005—Intelsat 804 suffers electrical power system anomaly—TOTAL LOSS

DON’T WAIT FOR THE NEXT SATELLITE OUTAGE

Allow us to uplink your paging data to two separate satellites for complete redundancy! CVC owns and operates two separate earth stations and specializes in uplink services for paging carriers. Join our list of satisfied uplink customers.

• Each earth station features hot standby redundancy UPS and Generator back-up Redundant TNPP Gateways On shelf spares for all critical components
• 24/7 staffing and support

For inquires please call or e-mail Stephan Suker at 800-696-6474 or steves@cvcpaging.com

GLOBAL TECHNICAL ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS

YOUR SERVICES PARTNER FOR
GLENAYRE™ PAGING EQUIPMENT
GL3000 Paging Terminals - C2000 Controllers
GL3200 Internet Gateways - Transmitter Equipment

GTES is the only Glenayre authorized software support provider in the paging industry. With years of combined experience in Glenayre hardware and software support, GTES offers the industry the most professional support and engineering staff available.

EQUIPMENT SUPPORT PROGRAMS

• GTES Partner Maintenance Program
• Glenayre Product Sales
• Software Licenses and Software Upgrades
• Feature License Codes
• New & Used Spare Parts and Repairs
• Customer Phone Support and On-Site Services
• Product Training

CALL US TODAY FOR YOUR SUPPORT NEEDS

How Could IPhone MMS Crash AT&T's Network?

Stephen Lawson, IDG News Service
Thursday, September 24, 2009 7:40 PM PDT

All the hand wringing over the Friday launch of MMS (Multimedia Messaging Service) on AT&T iPhones may be misplaced for a service that hasn't been a huge success on most other phones.

Apple let down iPhone watchers and owners when it announced in June that iPhone 3.0 software would support MMS but implied that AT&T would not yet allow it. The service launch was delayed several times, with exclusive carrier AT&T citing the need to make sure its network was ready. The feature will finally become generally available on AT&T iPhones on Friday when iTunes delivers a carrier settings update for the wildly popular phone. The carrier has said it expects "record volumes" of MMS traffic after the launch. MMS lets people send pictures, audio recordings, video clips or contact information along with an SMS (Short Message Service) message.

However, the service in question has been out for years on other handsets and hasn't exactly taken the mobile world by storm. In 2008, MMS made up just 2.5 percent of all messages sent from phones worldwide, meaning about 97.5 percent were SMS text messages, according to ABI Research. ABI expects the MMS share to grow to just 4.5 percent by 2014.

Given the amount of data that iPhone fans are already using on AT&T's network, for Web browsing, video, e-mail and social networking, it would take quite a popularity breakthrough for MMS to drag down the infrastructure through sheer traffic, analysts said. However, the carrier's fears in one respect may have been justified, said ABI analyst Dan Shey.

Several factors have dampened the popularity of MMS, according to analysts and industry observers. A big one is that the messages still don't always get through.

"Interoperability between carriers has always been an issue, and that's why MMS usage hasn't really taken off," Shey said. Delivering multimedia content from one phone and one network to another can be complicated with photos and gets even more involved when it comes to video, with large file sizes and multiple available formats, he said. What's attached in an MMS, 98 percent of the time, is just a picture, he said.

Another problem has been the complicated user interfaces on some phones and networks, which at times have forced senders to go through several steps to attach their content and recipients to go to a link within an SMS and provide a password along the way. The iPhone streamlines this process for iPhone users but not necessarily for the recipients of their messages.

The economics of MMS may not be attractive for either users or service providers. Even though each message uses a lot more network capacity than an SMS, which is limited to 160 characters of text, they typically count the same as an SMS against a bundled plan, Shey said. As a result, carriers haven't had an incentive to market the capability, he said.

And users of advanced phones now have alternatives to being charged for sharing content with their friends. For example, it's possible to post a photo to a Facebook page directly through Facebook's iPhone application.

Carriers will eventually figure out a way to monetize user sharing of content, but it probably won't be through MMS, said Mark Jacobstein, CEO of iSkoot, at the Mobilize conference earlier this month in San Francisco. Jacobstein is a serial entrepreneur in the mobile data world whose current company develops a variety of phone software. "The problem is not demand but implementation," he said.

The increase in MMS traffic from iPhone users isn't likely to put a much greater strain on AT&T's network, said In-Stat infrastructure analyst Allen Nogee. The carrier's current woes stem from having to deploy new base stations for 3G while selling a hugely popular handset that subscribers love to use for data, he said. Most customers won't just send one big MMS after another and overload the network, Nogee said.

However, AT&T may have had good reason to make sure its infrastructure was ready for MMS, ABI's Shey said. Even if the new feature doesn't swallow huge amounts of overall capacity, all those messages eventually need to be separated out and sent through an exchange point called an MMSC (MMS service center). AT&T's engineers may have set up that infrastructure for a smaller number of messages and then faced the prospect of MMS becoming possible on all iPhones.

If they learned anything from the experience of watching data traffic grow exponentially after the iPhone itself hit the market, they may have wanted to beef up the MMS portion of their system before the new feature hit all those phones, Shey said.

"All operators are just fanatic about ensuring that their network is not over-utilized," Shey said. "I'm sure the network folks got involved and said, 'We'd better test this.'"

Intelligent Solutions for Paging & Wireless Data

WiPath manufactures a wide range of highly unique and innovative hardware and software solutions in paging and mobile data for:

• Emergency Mass Alert & Messaging Emergency Services Communications Utilities Job Management Telemetry and Remote Switching Fire House Automation
• Load Shedding and Electrical Services Control

PDT3000 Paging Data Terminal

• FLEX & POCSAG Built-in POCSAG encoder Huge capcode capacity Parallel, 2 serial ports, 4 relays
• Message & system monitoring

Paging Controlled Moving Message LED Displays

• Variety of sizes Indoor/outdoor
• Integrated paging receiver

PDR3000/PSR3000 Paging Data Receivers

• Highly programmable, off-air decoders Message Logging & remote control Multiple I/O combinations and capabilities
• Network monitoring and alarm reporting

Specialized Paging Solutions

• Emergency Mass Alerting Remote telemetry switching & control Fire station automation PC interfacing and message management Paging software and customized solutions Message interception, filtering, redirection, printing & logging Cross band repeating, paging coverage infill, store and forward
• Alarm interfaces, satellite linking, IP transmitters, on-site systems

Mobile Data Terminals & Two Way Wireless  Solutions

	Fleet tracking, messaging, job processing, and field service management Automatic vehicle location (AVL), GPS CDMA, GPRS, ReFLEX, conventional, and trunked radio interfaces

Contact
Postal Address:	WiPath Communications LLC 4845 Dumbbarton Court Cumming, GA 30040
Street Address:	4845 Dumbbarton Court Cumming, GA 30040
Web site:	www.wipath.com CLICK
E-mail:	info@wipath.com CLICK
Phone:	770-844-6218
Fax:	770-844-6574
WiPath Communications

 SEE WEB FOR COMPLETE LIST:
www.preferredwireless.com/equipment CLICK HERE

Too Much To List • Call or E-Mail

Preferred Wireless Rick McMichael 888-429-4171 rickm@preferredwireless.com CLICK HERE www.preferredwireless.com/equipment OR HERE