by William Nicoll


When you take a call on your cell phone, listen to the radio as you drive
down the highway, or tune into satellite television at home, you probably
take for granted how those signals are getting to you. It was Arthur C.
Clarke who so aptly put it: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is
indistinguishable from magic." And if you took for granted the technology
behind today's wireless wonders, you never even gave a thought to the policy
that lets them exist. Welcome to the exciting world of "spectrum policy," in
which our representatives in the U.S. government have been laying down the
law for almost 80 years.

Spectrum policy has its origins in the Radio Act of 1927, in which Congress
established the the Federal Radio Commission, the first regulatory
organization for the airwaves. It wasn't for seven years, however, that more
comprehensive rules were passed with the Communications Act of 1934. One of
the major results of this act was the creation of the Federal Communications
Commission, or FCC.

The FCC, under the auspices of the Communication Act, establishes and
supervises policy regarding commercial uses of wired and wireless
communications in the United States. Over the years, there have been many
amendments to the Federal Communications Act to keep pace with technology,
but its spirit remains intact.

Unfortunately, the public has very little knowledge of what the FCC actually
does. That is because the nature of spectrum policy is very technical, and
the effects of such policy aren't readily seen. When was the last time you
cared about at what frequency maritime navigation radio or garage door
openers operated? With just a little education, this can be changed. We can
start with some basic information about the electromagnetic spectrum.

Most people know that light travels in waves. It turns out that light is
only one part of a continuum of electromagnetic phenomena; these phenomena
are characterized by their frequency, which is a measure of how many times a
wave moves from crest to crest in a constant period of time. The accepted
unit of frequency is the Hertz (abbreviated Hz) one cycle per second.

By drawing a line that represents low frequencies on the left and high
frequencies on the right, one can set up the electromagnetic spectrum and
divide it into parts. From left to right, the common bands of the spectrum
are known as: radio, microwave, infrared, visible light, ultraviolet,
X-rays, and gamma rays. These many types of waves are all just photons of
different wavelengths. Over the years scientists have given bands of the
spectrum different names for expedience. It is much easier to say "radio
waves" than "500 MHz electromagnetic radiation".

With a basic understanding of electromagnetic waves, spectrum policy becomes
a little friendlier. Spectrum policy is primarily concerned with radio and
microwaves ranging from 3 kHz to 300 GHz. It is at these frequencies that
wireless communication is most viable. For example, you wouldn't want to
listen to your favorite rock station on a gamma-ray radio; the sheer energy
these high frequencies carry would probably give you radiation poisoning
before the song was finished.

Frequencies lower than 3 kHz are also impractical. Because their wavelengths
are so large, they would need proportionally larger antennas. The Navy
recently closed a 28-mile-long antenna in Wisconsin that allowed it to
communicate with ballistic missile submarines deep under the ocean.
With the battle lines drawn, the question remains who gets which
frequencies. Many people compare the spectrum to a natural resource, like
oil; its distribution is very important. The government reserves almost 70
percent of the usable spectrum for itself. Every government radio
application, from military satellites and forest ranger walkie-talkies to
CIA communications and air traffic control, takes place on these reserved
frequencies.

Not surprisingly, a separate agency is responsible for government allocation
of frequency: the National Telecommunications and Information Administration
(NTIA). The FCC has no control over use of these government frequencies.
There are several rationales behind this: Reserving a wide band of
frequencies for themselves ensures that the government will never have to
pay third parties for communications. The NTIA, in the interests of national
security, can keep the usage of certain frequency bands classified. The
downside of this is that very little oversight exists to see if these
frequencies are being used efficiently.

The remaining 30 percent of the radio spectrum is doled out by the FCC. They
classify frequencies in two ways: licensed and unlicensed. Unlicensed
spectrum may be used by anyone, anytime. Unfortunately, there are no
guarantees against signal interference with unlicensed spectrum. This
usually isn't a problem with unlicensed spectrum because many devices
operating on these bands are low power, such as cordless phones, EZ-Pass
tags, wireless LANs, and microwave ovens.

Licensed spectrum makes up the bulk - 98 percent - of the frequencies given
out by the FCC. Cell phones, radio, and television are the primary users of
licensed spectrum, and they are big business. Television advertising revenue
in 2001 was over $35 billion. Radio had almost $20 billion in revenue. With
this kind of money, politics are bound to get involved, and the FCC hasn't
escaped. Over the years, companies have lobbied the FCC for use of certain
frequencies - say, the 2 GHz range for satellite radio. It used to be the
case that companies would get what they wanted. Until the last decade or so,
unused frequencies were still available, but that is no longer the case.

Today, frequencies are becoming scarce. Consequently, they're becoming much
more valuable. This forces companies to innovate more efficient uses of
spectrum, so we've seen many advances in communications technology. Even so,
the value of certain frequencies has skyrocketed - up to $1 billion per MHz
for certain bands in cellular use. Some people have begun to question why
the FCC was giving away such valuable frequencies as political favors, so
they responded by forming an investigative group known as the Spectrum
Policy Task Force. It is this group's job to evaluate 80 years of policy and
determine where reform is needed. One recommendation they've made is the
increased use of spectrum auctions, where frequencies are sold to the
highest bidder. The Bush administration hopes to make over $25 billion on
spectrum auctions in the near future. Keep that in mind the next time you
are on your cell phone and you hear someone say "Talk is cheap."

http://www.thetartan.org/article.jsp?id=693

"Mike Terry" wrote
(the whole bloody article, instead of just the link)

highest bidder. The Bush administration hopes to make over $25 billion on
spectrum auctions in the near future. Keep that in mind the next time you
are on your cell phone and you hear someone say "Talk is cheap."

http://www.thetartan.org/article.jsp?id=693


This administration has no more chance of seeing all those spectrum sales
than Clinton's did before him. It is Congress that has been frothing at the
mouth since the design of HDTV. That was supposed to free up all the
broadcast TV spectrum. Problem is, Congress realized they can't quite "take"
that away from people (yet). Not that they aren't trying hard to figure out
a way, and this administration, like the last one, is helping. Lastly, the
author's quip at the end of the editorial is off base. Talk *is* cheap, it
has never been less expensive to call locally, or anywhere in the world.

Jack