eHam.net - Amateur Radio (Ham Radio) Community

Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net


QSL Managers
     

Ham Links
     



[Articles Home]  [Add Article]  

ARRL Responds to FCC's Proposed Allocation for Medical Devices in 70cm Band

from The ARRL Letter, Vol 28, No 32 on August 14, 2009
Website: http://www.arrl.org/
View comments about this article!

ARRL Responds to FCC's Proposed Allocation for Medical Devices in 70 cm Band:

ARRL General Counsel Chris Imlay, W3KD, on behalf of the ARRL, filed comments http://www.arrl.org/news/files/MannFoundationDocket_09-36Comments08_11_09.pdf on August 11 regarding a Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM), ET Docket 09-36, issued by the FCC in March 2009 http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-09-20A1.pdf. In the NPRM, the FCC proposed to allocate spectrum and adopt service and technical rules for the utilization of new implanted medical devices that operate on 413-457 MHz (70 cm). According to the Commission, these devices -- called implanted neuromuscular microstimulators -- would greatly expand the use of functional electric stimulation to restore sensation, mobility and function to those persons with paralyzed limbs and organs; they would be implanted in a patient and function as wireless broadband medical micro-power networks (MMNs). These devices would be used on the 70 cm band on a secondary basis as part of the Medical Data Radiocommunication Service in Part 95 of the FCC rules. The Amateur Radio Service has a secondary allocation in the 70 cm band.

Researchers with the Alfred Mann Foundation -- a leading medical research organization located in Santa Clarita, California http://www.aemf.org/ -- have developed a wireless medical micro-power network to tie together tiny devices implanted in victims of paralysis, creating an artificial nervous system to restore sensation, mobility, and function to paralyzed limbs and organs. "The Mann Foundation argues that the frequency range just above 400 MHz is optimum for their application, which requires no more than 1 mW of RF spread across about 5 MHz of bandwidth," ARRL Chief Executive Officer David Sumner, K1ZZ, wrote in "It Seems to Us," published in the June 2009 issue of QST http://www.arrl.org/news/features/2009/06/01/10784/. "However, recognizing the presence of a variety of incumbent radio services in that range, specifically including the amateur service, they have proposed four channels for flexibility in avoiding localized interference. Two of the four channels are 426-432 and 438-444 MHz; the other two are above and below the 420-450 MHz band."

In its comments to the FCC regarding the NPRM, the ARRL said it believes that the choice of frequency bands for MMNs as proposed is "unfortunate and unnecessary" and that "the WMTS [Wireless Medical Telemetry Service] offers a far more suitable solution than does the 413-457 MHz band for MMNs."

Sumner, in his editorial, said that the FCC's proposed rules raise two concerns: "First and foremost, the devices would be required to accept interference only from stations authorized to operate on a primary basis. The Mann Foundation has assured us that amateur stations will not cause its system to malfunction, so we see no reason why this cannot be reflected in the rules, even though our allocation is on a secondary basis. Second, while the Mann Foundation researchers appear to have done their homework, others who try to take advantage of the new rules may not be as rigorous."

The ARRL asserts in its comments that due to redundant interference rejection design, the devices developed by the Alfred Mann Foundation "appear to have some reasonable prospect of avoiding the disastrous consequences of RF interference to implanted MMNs." The ARRL stressed, however, that the FCC should not permit the marketing of MMNs or any similar device in the 420-450 MHz band: "(1) unless and until thorough RF interference susceptibility testing is conducted on the AMF devices relative to high power Amateur Radio equipment; (2) at parameters other than those inherent in the Mann system, which incorporates notably redundant interference rejection design characteristics; and (3) without very specific patient notifications and labeling of the body-worn MCUs [Master Control Units] and other portable components which provide firm assurance that the devices will not malfunction in the presence of RF fields from authorized radio services in the same bands."

The ARRL did acknowledge that it thought the Commission to be correct when it stated in the NPRM that "[g]iven the low transmitter power and duty cycle limits that would typically be used by either the implanted MMN device or the external MCU, we expect that the risk of interference from MMNs to incumbent operations in these frequency bands would be negligibly small." The ARRL pointed out, however, that no testing has been done to verify this conclusion and "such testing should be concluded and the results analyzed before this anticipatory conclusion can be relied upon."

In its comments, the ARRL made note of the fact that there is Part 90 spectrum above 450 MHz available for low-power biomedical telemetry, but "the Alfred Mann Foundation argues that bands between 450 and 470 MHz are unsuitable due to the fact that the band is 'congested and populated with commercial, high-power transmitters that could preclude reliable operation of lower-power, wireless medical implant devices.' This, the ARRL said, "is a very worrisome contention, and not the argument that should be made by the proponent of a new service that is secondary to other incumbent licensees. ARRL contends that if the 450-470 MHz band hosts services that are incompatible with reliable operation of MMNs, then the 420-450 MHz band, and especially the segment proposed for MMNs at 438-444 MHz is equally incompatible with MMNs."

Pointing out that Amateur Radio television transmitters and repeaters and FM voice repeater input and outputs operate in this segment in particular, "the potential for interference to MMNs is on the same order, or worse, than would be the case if MMNs were to operate in the Part 90 biomedical telemetry band between 450 and 470 MHz," the ARRL told the FCC. "In the segment 426-432 MHz, amateur television stations transmit on a wide bandwidth basis. Amateur Radio stations are permitted to operate at power levels up to 1500 W PEP output, and the RF environment at 420-450 MHz, with primary government radiolocation facilities and highpower amateur facilities is no more conducive to reliable MMN operation than would be the 450-470 MHz band."

The ARRL also voiced concerns that nowhere in the NPRM does it mention what the allocation status of MMNs would be relative to the Amateur Radio Service. Though the Alfred Mann Foundation has proposed that MMNs would be secondary to incumbent licensed operations in the subject bands, the Amateur Service is presently secondary to government radiolocation in this band; this represents a cooperative sharing arrangement that is satisfactory to both government agencies and the Amateur Service, the League contends.

"While it is presumed that the proposal is for MMNs to be secondary to both government radiolocation and to the Amateur Service (as opposed to Amateur stations and MMNs being co-secondary) this is not clear from the NPRM," the ARRL maintained. "Because the interference susceptibility of MMN devices generally is not known, it would be improper to create a co-secondary allocation for MMNs anywhere in the 420-450 MHz band at this time. The Amateur Service has a practical inability to protect patients wearing RF susceptible MMNs from interference from ongoing amateur operations in the 420-450 MHz band, and therefore all MMN operation is going to have to be conditioned on the ability to withstand and operate in the presence of such high-power signals, and thus subordinate in allocation status to the Amateur Service. Unless this interference rejection capability is demonstrated by MMN proponents in advance, the devices should not be allowed to operate anywhere in the 420-450 MHz band."

Imlay and ARRL Technical Relations Manager Brennan Price, N4QX, met with the Alfred Mann Foundation in February 2009, but Imlay said that so far, they have not responded to the ARRL's request to "cooperate in a firm statement that their devices would not malfunction in the presence of nearby RF signals from Amateur Radio stations. Failing that, these comments reflect our continuing concern about the effect on implant patients from unpredictably close Amateur Radio station operations. Other radio services affected, both above and below the 430-450 MHz band, are taking similar positions."

Source:

The ARRL Letter Vol. 28, No. 32 August 14, 2009

Member Comments:
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
 
ARRL Responds to FCC's Proposed Allocation for Med  
by K4RAF on August 14, 2009 Mail this to a friend!
The ARRL is "unfortunate and unnecessary"... They're on the wrong side of the issue but what's new?

Raf
 
RE: ARRL Responds to FCC's Proposed Allocation for Med  
by KE4MOB on August 15, 2009 Mail this to a friend!
"Though the Alfred Mann Foundation has proposed that MMNs would be secondary to incumbent licensed operations in the subject bands, the Amateur Service is presently secondary to government radiolocation in this band; this represents a cooperative sharing arrangement that is satisfactory to both government agencies and the Amateur Service, the League contends."

So let me get this straight. According to the ARRL, amateur radio is more important than the health of the general population???

My, don't we have a high opinion of ourselves....
 
RE: ARRL Responds to FCC's Proposed Allocation for  
by WN9HJW on August 15, 2009 Mail this to a friend!
[QUOTE]So let me get this straight. According to the ARRL, amateur radio is more important than the health of the general population??? [/QUOTE]


No. That is not what the ARRL is saying. Not even close.
 
RE: ARRL Responds to FCC's Proposed Allocation for  
by KE4MOB on August 15, 2009 Mail this to a friend!
Uhh...yeah, that's what they're saying.

The ARRL is saying that these devices shouldn't be allowed to operate on a secondary basis side by side with amateur stations "ostensibly under the reasoning" that it may adversely harm the devices in question.

Where have I heard that argument before? Oh yeah. BPL. And a dozen other technologies that wanted to use frequencies that we also use. Because ham radio is more important than..providing broadband service. Or inexpensive satellite communications (remember the little LEO scare?). Or...allowing the Air Force to test advanced radars.

Now, one really has to wonder...what's more important here? Here's a news flash: the FCC's job is to administer a finite resource in the most equitable fashion possible. Not protect the activities of a tiny minority of the population. And 650,000 hams (75% who aren't even active) just doesn't cut it in the big picture.

Too often, the powers that be paints the picture as us vs. them. And too often, we're just on the wrong side of the argument because we think we're amateur radio operators, and damn it, we're important.
 
RE: ARRL Responds to FCC's Proposed Allocation for  
by W6EM on August 16, 2009 Mail this to a friend!
"ARRL contends that if the 450-470 MHz band hosts services that are incompatible with reliable operation of MMNs, then the 420-450 MHz band, and especially the segment proposed for MMNs at 438-444 MHz is equally incompatible with MMNs."

Argue all you want about the alleged ARRL motivation being our inflated self-worth or Newington ego, but the above words are the bottom line.

If the widget-makers argue that 450-470 is incompatible, our segment contains just as much high powered analog and digital stuff except where our transmitter powers are limited due to air force radars such as PAVE PAWS.

Now, as I and others have yelled in earlier threads, if these widget-makers are aware of the high powered AF radars (probably 50dB above anything in the 450-470 segments that supposedly bother them) then let them suffer the consequences.

With history as a guide, though, it will be us who receive the public's disdain over some poor, disabled wearer's pain and suffering from an errant implanted device and not a high powered military radar. Let alone the fact that the FCC OKed the use of federal/amateur spectrum.

Where's the NTIA (the FCC equivalent for federal users) on all of this?

Lee
W6EM
 
ARRL Responds to FCC's Proposed Allocation for Medical Devic  
by WA1RNE on August 16, 2009 Mail this to a friend!
"In the segment 426-432 MHz, amateur television stations transmit on a wide bandwidth basis. Amateur Radio stations are permitted to operate at power levels up to 1500 W PEP output, and the RF environment at 420-450 MHz, with primary government radiolocation facilities and highpower amateur facilities is no more conducive to reliable MMN operation than would be the 450-470 MHz band."


>>> That's a bit of a contradiction - and almost self-defeating isn't it? To admit that we operate hi power in this segment isn't something I'd want to advertise right now.

Secondly, the primary government radiolocation facilities, a.k.a. the Department of Defense have already mandated power reductions of amateur repeaters in the vicinity of Pave Paws radar installations, so again, the ARRL's statements contradict their own purpose.

Hams have operated on a secondary basis on 70cm for many years and at the same time, there has been a huge influx of demand for UHF spectrum by public service agencies, i.e. police and fire to name just two. Now a manufacturer of medical devices wants to pay for spectrum in the same area.

For the ARRL not to have seen the handwriting on the wall for all these years and believes they will be able to thwart this with amateur television needs is rather comical.


...WA1RNE
 
RE: ARRL Responds to FCC's Proposed Allocation for Medical D  
by W6EM on August 16, 2009 Mail this to a friend!
RNE:"Secondly, the primary government radiolocation facilities, a.k.a. the Department of Defense have already mandated power reductions of amateur repeaters in the vicinity of Pave Paws radar installations, so again, the ARRL's statements contradict their own purpose."

I suspect ARRL is somewhat concerned about statements made by the widget applicants that the 420-450 spectrum would be less of a problem than 450-500MHz.

Again, the 50W transmitter limit mandated for military radar is to allow it to more accurately track blips. Nothing said about reducing the ERP of its MULTI-MEGAWATT transmitters.

So, RNE, what's better. Lower power limits on amateurs in the vicinity of multi-megawatt af installations or higher limits and no multi-megawatt af radars?
 
RE: ARRL Responds to FCC's Proposed Allocation for Medical D  
by WA1RNE on August 17, 2009 Mail this to a friend!
"So, RNE, what's better. Lower power limits on amateurs in the vicinity of multi-megawatt af installations or higher limits and no multi-megawatt af radars?"


>>> Well Lee, the first choice is the only sensible one.

As you know, we've been through this already - National Defense makes sense, and over-rides the needs of amateurs, any and every day.

As for the ARRL's objection to MMN's use of 413-457 Mhz:

#1: From a technical standpoint, the ARRL has no say in what goes on between 413 and 420 Mhz, since amateurs don't have an allocation there.

#2: The basis of the ARRL's objection is, quote:

"In the interests of the Amateur Radio Service in continued access to the 420-450 MHz band for the provision of effective emergency and public service communications..."


This statement has unfortunately become over-used, and is IMO, tainted with bull. (I realize this is not new news.)

Considering that:


* Amateurs utilize ONLY 440-450 Mhz for emergency communications.

* Amateurs use this spectrum on a secondary basis, so it makes no sense to be dependent on this band for EmComm purposes.

* With the UNDER-UTILIZATION of all of our VHF and UHF allocations, surely in its infinite wisdom, the ARRL would have created an Emcomm plan that takes this contingency into account.


* The ARRL is citing the FCC's recommended frequency allocations for Wireless Medical Telemetry,

608-614 MHz
1395-1400 MHz
1427-1432 MHz


....which are not covered under the FCC's recommended allocations.


*** A reputable medical research foundation has determined that certain 24 Mhz section within the 400 Mhz region is more suitable for it's application, an Injectable Microstimulator System to help people who have suffered from paralysis after a stroke.

Approximately 60% of the requested spectrum falls OUTSIDE of amateur allocations between 413-420Mhz and 449.75-457 Mhz.


Of the 30 Mhz of the shared allocation that we occupy, 20 Mhz, or 66% which is recommended by the ARRL for satellite, ATV, EME and weak signal use. These "bandplans" are now several decades old and like a lot of our spectrum above 50 Mhz, doesn't see a lot of use.


If a research foundation comes to the FCC with a product that could enhance the quality of people's lives, possibly creating a new market and even new jobs, something tells me the FCC is going to take another look, don't you think?

BTW, this is a HUGE market.

Quote, from the Mann Foundation web site:

"The US market for medical devices is the largest worldwide, with an estimated $86 billion in revenues in 2006, or close to 40% of the global market of $220 billion (Advamed, 2006). Throughout the past years the US market has exhibited growth of approximately 10%, a trend that is expected to continue in the coming years. Cardiovascular, orthopedic and surgical devices make up a major part of the market, with almost 50% of total revenues.


The Mann Foundation is funded with a $1-2 billion dollar endowment, so should a protracted fight ensue, they obviously have some staying power.

http://www.mannfbe.org/foundations/


No offense intended, but with the aging amateur population, this product might be considered significantly higher on the priority list than amateur radio's needs for spectrum - of which we have alternatives to use that meet our needs.


...WA1RNE
 
RE: ARRL Responds to FCC's Proposed Allocation for Medical D  
by WA1RNE on August 17, 2009 Mail this to a friend!
* The ARRL is citing the FCC's recommended frequency allocations for Wireless Medical Telemetry,

608-614 MHz
1395-1400 MHz
1427-1432 MHz


....which are not covered under the FCC's recommended allocations.



>>> This was supposed to read "but The Mann Foundations frequency allocation needs are not covered under the current FCC bandplan."


...WA1RNE
 
ARRL Responds to FCC's Proposed Allocation for Medical Devic  
by KE4ZHN on August 19, 2009 Mail this to a friend!
I can see it now...some poor soul with one of these implants break dancing every time his neighbor the ham transmits on 70cm.....
 
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.

Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help

Other News Articles
Emergency Communications Demonstration at RMNP:
Amateur Radio Enthusiasts to Host Convention on Weekend:
Ham Radio Fans to Hold Weekend Expo:
So, You Want to Be a Ham?
Radio Operators Plan Hurricane Season Drill: