FCC Queries Wireless Internet Provider About Interference to Hams

NEWINGTON, CT, Feb 15, 2001--The FCC has asked a wireless Internet system provider what it intends to do to eliminate interference to Amateur Radio operations in the Dallas, Texas area. The FCC wrote Darwin Networks Inc on February 8, 2001, regarding complaints of harmful interference to Amateur TV on 2.4 GHz that's said to be a result of the company's deployment of Part 15 devices in an apartment complex.

The FCC said Darwin Networks' Part 15 devices at the Post Townlake Village property in Dallas apparently were installed in the apartment complex to provide Internet service using wireless 2.4 GHz nodes.

In the letter, FCC Special Counsel for Amateur Radio Enforcement Riley Hollingsworth noted that operators of Part 15 devices are required to cease operation should harmful interference occur to authorized (ie, licensed) spectrum users. "Darwin Networks is obligated under Commission rules to locate the source of interference caused by its equipment and make necessary corrections within a reasonable time," he said.

The FCC defines "harmful interference" under §97.3(a)(23) as "Interference which endangers the functioning of a radionavigation service or of other safety services or seriously degrades, obstructs or repeatedly interrupts a radiocommunication service operating in accordance with the Radio Regulations." A similar definition appears in the Part 15 rules.

According to Hollingsworth, Darwin's chief technical officer, Jeff Wellenmeyer, had written the unidentified complainant stating that its devices were operating under Part 18 Industrial, Scientific and Medical rules, which would not obligate the company to resolve amateur complaints. But Hollingsworth said it appears that Darwin is not operating Part 18 ISM devices but Part 15 devices that are not covered by the same sort of exception. He also pointed out a statement in the Darwin letter that said the company was operating under §15.249 of the FCC rules.

Hollingsworth gave Darwin Networks 10 days to reply. The letter was send to the company via its attorney, Terry Cavanaugh of Washington, DC.

Previous: FCC Amateur Radio Enforcement Log

Next: Maine Hams Oppose Mobile Hand-Held Devices Bill