What Should the Wireless Agenda Be?

Wireless Review asked: What wireless communications industry issue do you think the next presidential administration should address first?

• PCIA: "The next administration must place an early focus on ensuring that enough spectrum will be made available and fairly allocated for the development and implementation of 3G services. The implementation of 3G technology will translate to tremendous improvements in productivity and services for businesses and governments, and will benefit consumers worldwide.

  "This implementation will take the coordination of many different parties. PCIA applauds President Clinton's recent memorandum (Oct. 13, 2000) that jump-started this effort with an aggressive, yet realistic time frame for identifying and allocating 3G spectrum in the United States. The time frames set out in that directive must be maintained. PCIA looks forward to actively working with the next administration, the NTIA, the FCC and other government representatives to expeditiously identify appropriate spectrum for 3G and to work with incumbent spectrum users to address their needs."
  — Jay Kitchen, PCIA president & CEO

• AT&T Wireless: "We believe the proposal put forth by the White House and the FCC on Oct. 13, calling for additional radio-frequency spectrum for U.S. carriers should be a high priority for any new administration. The memorandum is an important first step in the process of ensuring that providers have the spectrum resources they need to deliver advanced data and multimedia services to wireless users across the United States. Without these additional resources, the American people would be deprived of the new services and benefits that 3G technology will bring, and U.S. leadership in the world marketplace for broadband, wireless Internet and multimedia services would be threatened.

  "The initiative also appropriately underscores the U.S. commitment to the agreements that were reached at the World Radiocommunication Conference regarding the introduction of 3G services - based largely on the proposals put forth by the United States.

  "Finally, the announcement demonstrates the importance of putting in place a process to ensure that 3G-spectrum decisions will be made fairly and openly. This initiative should give all parties a forum to develop the best plans for implementing 3G services in this country, while preserving the federal government's ability to use the nation's airwaves in support of its national security and other important missions. Decisions must be made quickly, however, and the time line set forth today must be strictly adhered to if the United States is to keep pace with the rest of the world.
  — John Zeglis, AT&T Wireless Group chairman & CEO

• Sprint PCS: "Wireless carriers' business plans should not be dependent on the luck of the draw. However, states - notably California - continue to ration telephone numbers through lotteries to avoid implementing much-needed area-code relief. Artificially limiting demand for wireless service through lotteries is not the answer.

  "The FCC has determined that available number resources should be assigned on a first-come, first-served basis to carriers that can show they have a need for them. There is no reason whatsoever to permit rationing - anywhere, anytime.

  "In the past, the FCC has stated that rationing should occur `only . . . when it is clear that an area code will run out of NXX codes before implementation of a relief plan.' However, even with past rationing procedures, the FCC recognized the need to assign additional numbers outside the rationing process to carriers facing imminent exhaust.

  "Whatever may have been the justification for rationing in the past, there is no justification for rationing in the future. The FCC has adopted new assignment rules to ensure that only those carriers in need of numbers receive them. The current system doesn't follow the intent of the new rules because numbering resources are assigned by the luck of the draw rather than on a verified needs-based, first-come, first-served basis.

  "Indeed, the only reason to maintain rationing is to permit states to do precisely what is expressly forbidden. The FCC has stated repeatedly that `state commissions may not use rationing as a substitute for area code relief,' but that is plainly what some states want to do."
  — Charles Levine, Sprint PCS COO