Report of First Meeting of the FCC Technological Advisory Council

Executive Overview

The FCC Technological Advisory Council (TAC) held its first meeting on
April 30,1999 in Washington, D.C. The Council is to provide
scientifically supportable information on those emerging technologies
that could fundamentally impact the work of the FCC. In response to five
specific requests from the FCC, TAC organized three focus groups with
moderators to address: spectrum management; access to telecommunications
by persons with disabilities; and network interconnection and access.
These groups will work between the approximately three formal meetings
per year of the TAC to provide expert advice relative to the FCC
requests.

Current regulation of the electromagnetic spectrum, which assumes a
fundamental scarcity of this resource, is implemented by assigning
specific portions of the spectrum to a specific use. The TAC spectrum
management focus activity should explore those new technologies, such as
ultrawideband or software defined radios, which might allow the FCC to
update this regulatory model so as to promote more efficient usage.

The Commission is required by statute to take special action relative to
people with disabilities. One objective of the focus group for this
issue would be to make all designers of equipment consider how their
products might be used by persons operating under constrained
conditions. This would not only minimize the need for (and cost of )
ancillary assistive apparatus by persons with disabilities, but make the
products more valuable to the general population. Television closed
captions are an example of an assistive introduced to compensate for a
disability but found to be more generally useful by everyone.

Efficiently defined interfaces at network interconnection and access
points are required to make communications both universally accessible
and to fairly implement competition. The problem of defining
interconnection points and protocols, which this focus group must deal
with, is exacerbated by the proliferation of new technologies,
nonequivalent architectures, and an ever expanding set of service
requirements. TAC should provide guidance to the FCC on the efficacy of
(and special issues created by) new technology which may be introduced
both in access and core networks of all types (wireline, fiber, wireless
satellite, etc.).A minimum set of interoperability standards for each
layer of the protocol stack may be recommended.

Each of the three focus groups and their subgroups will have publicly
accessible websites to assure openness of work in progress, and will
report back at the next TAC general meeting on September 22,1999.

***Prepared by* J. A. Bellisio**

***Approved by* R.W. Lucky**

***May 26,1999***

**[Report of First Meeting of the FCC Technological Advisory
Council]{.underline}**

1.  Introduction

# The FCC formed the Technological Advisory Council (TAC) to help provide the technical expertise the Commission needs to stay abreast of innovations and new developments in the communications industry. As announced, the first meeting of the TAC took place at Friday, April 30, 1999, at The Portals, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, D.C. This report is a distillation of that meeting written to facilitate the work of the Council. A complete videotape of the meeting serves as the verbatim minutes (*see Annex 1*).

Designated Federal Officer (DFO) Stagg Newman opened the meeting, and in
remarks by FCC Chairman William Kennard and Commissioner Susan Ness, the
purpose of TAC was strongly endorsed with the expectation that the
deliberations would remain technologically focussed and aimed at the
greater good of the nation as a whole.

TAC is organized under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA). Some
major aspects of FACA rules are reviewed in this report to help with the
organization of activities, but TAC will depend on the legal guidance of
the FCC to be sure of continuing FACA compliance. Considerable technical
work will need to be done between meetings. To preserve mandated
transparency and accessibility, primary interactions will be via public
websites.

The FCC has made five official requests to the TAC for technical work.
These requests fall into three major areas: spectrum management; network
interconnection and access; and accessibility for disabled persons.
Focus groups with moderators were formed at the meeting to address each
of the three areas. The membership and directives to these groups are
described. This report gives a summary of the meeting's roundtable
discussion, which followed an extended presentation of each FCC request.
The results of some activities that took place shortly after the formal
meeting are also reported here. It is expected that first
recommendations will be available by the next formal TAC meeting on
September 22, 1999.

2.  Agenda

Technological Advisory Committee Agenda-1st Meeting

Friday, April 30, 1999

Federal Communications Commission Meeting Room

The Portals, 445 12th Street, S.W., Washington, D.C.

10:00 am Opening Stagg Newman

> Designated Federal Officer

10:05 am Welcome and Remarks (opportunity

> for remarks by other commissioners) Chairman
>
> William Kennard

10:15 am Introductions of Council Members

> with Brief Remarks (if any) Council Members

10:45 am Overview of the FCC, the Federal Advisory Rebecca Dorch,

> Committee Act Deputy Chief ,OET
>
> Key Technological Issues Confronting the Stagg Newman,
>
> Commission Chief Technologist, FCC

11:25 am Introduction of the Issues That the Chairman Bob Lucky

> FCC Has Identified

11:30 am Description of Each Issue,

> Followed by Group Discussion Stagg Newman and delegate

12:00 pm Break

12:30 pm Issues, Continued

2:00 pm Open Floor Discussion for any Suggestions

> for Technological Issues that the Commission
>
> Should Consider Chairman Bob Lucky

2:30 pm Assignments, Organization and

> Going Forward Chairman Bob Lucky

3:00 pm Wrap Up - Meeting Adjourned Stagg Newman, DFO

3.  Membership of theTechnological Advisory Council

Except as indicated,all of the following were present at the First
Meeting:

***Chairperson***:

Dr. Bob Lucky -- Corporate Vice President, Applied Research, Telcordia
Technologies, formerly Bellcore (Bell Communications Research).

*Members of Council*:

\*Mr. Bruce Allan - Vice President and General Manager, Harris
Corporation,

\*Mr. Jose M. Alvarez Caban - Assistive Technology Specialist, Puerto
Rico Assistive Technology Project, University of Puerto Rico.

Dr.Jules A.Bellisio,*TAC Executive Director*, Chief Scientist and
Fellow, Executive Director, Telcordia Technologies, formerly Bellcore
(Bell Communications Research).

Dr. Vinton Cerf - Senior Vice President, Internet Architecture and
Technology, MCI Worldcom.

Ms. Susan Estrada - President and CEO, Aldea Communication.

Mr. Bran Ferren - President, R&D and Creative Technology Walt Disney
Imagineering

\*Dr. Richard Green - President and CEO, CableLabs,

Ms. Christine Hemrick - Vice President, Technology Communications,
Office of the CTO, Cisco Systems, Inc.

Mr. Dewayne Hendricks - General Manager, Wireless Business Unit, Com21.

Mr. Ross Ireland - Vice President - Engineering, SBC.

Dr. Charles E. Jackson - Independent consultant.

Mr. Kalle Kontson - Division Technology Manager, Center for
Electromagnetic Science and Vice President IIT Research Institute

Dr. William Lee - Chief Scientist, AirTouch/Vodaphone.

Dr. Paul Liao - Chief Technology Officer, Panasonic and President of
Panasonic Technologies.

Dr. Wah Lim - Vice President for Technology and Development for Hughes
Space and Communications Company.

Dr. Robert Martin - Chief Technology Officer of Bell Labs, Lucent.

Dr. David Nagel - President AT&T Labs and CTO for AT&T,

Mr. Glenn Reitmeier, Vice President, DTV and Web Media, Sarnoff
Laboratories.

Mr. Dennis Roberson - Vice President & CTO, Motorola.

Dr. Marvin Sirbu - Professor of Engineering and Public Policy, Professor
of Electrical & Computer Engineering, Professor - Graduate School of
Industrial Administration, and Chairman of the Information Networking
Institute, Carnegie Mellon University.

Dr. Gregg Vanderheiden - Professor - Human factors Group, Dept. of
Industrial Engineering, University of Wisconsin, and Director of Trace
Research and Development Center.

Mr. Jack Waters - VP of Network Engineering, Level 3 Communications.

Dr. Pat White - Director, Telecommunications Practice, AD Little.

Mr. Robert Zitter - Senior Vice President, Technology Operations, Home
Box Office.

*Designated Federal Officer*

Dr. Stagg Newman, Chief Technologist, Federal Communications Commission.

*Alternate Designated Federal Officer*

\*Mr. Dale Hatfield, Chief, Office of Engineering and Technology,
Federal Communications Commission.

\**Not present at first meeting*

*Annex 2 is a set of short biographies of each member.*

About 75 members of the public observed the meeting. There are no
comments from the public to be reported.

4.  Summary of Remarks by Commissioners

FCC Chairman William Kennard described how the need to remake the way
the FCC deals with technology was the genesis of the TAC. FCC
regulations must be kept relevant to the fast pace of technology, and
the Commission simply can not keep up using just in-house resources.
Engineers are inherently problem solvers, and many have come forth
volunteering to help the Commission. With the full expectation that the
members of the TAC will act as "honest brokers", remaining objective
with the best interests of the country and consumers as the first
priority, Chairman Kennard charged the TAC with producing
recommendations on some of the Commission's most pressing problems.

Commissioner Susan Ness expressed her hope that the TAC would be
instrumental in keeping the FCC "ahead of the curve" during a period of
technological revolution of monumental proportions. Change breeds not
only uncertainty but opportunity. TAC insights will help turn this
opportunity into a benefit for the consumer. TAC will be a success if it
can help the commission think through problems before they arise in a
regulatory context.

5.  Overview of the FCC and the Federal Advisory Committee Act

Rebecca Dorch, Deputy Chief , OET, described the mission of the FCC at a
very high level. It is an independent regulatory agency, not an
executive branch agency such as NTIA or FAA. It was established by
Congress to implement the Communications Act of 1934, as amended many
times. Its goals, unchanged since 1934,remain to:

regulate interstate and foreign commerce in communications by wire and
radio so as to make available, so far as possible, to all people of the
United States, without discrimination, \... a rapid, efficient,
nation-wide, and world-wide wire and radio communications service\....

FCC hallmarks are: impartially, transparency, and participation. This
means that rules, orders, opinions, public notices, etc. are all
published and that public comment is sought on proposed rules,
applications, and licenses. Any person or entity has a right to present
their views in rule making proceedings. Written records, meetings, and
web pages are open to the public.

Impartiality considerations keep the FCC and regulated industry separate
by way of rules covering financial interest, conflict of interest,
gifts, and post-employment. Just the perception or appearance of
impropriety are significantly important.

The TAC has been established as a federal advisory committee under the
Federal Advisory Committee Act. (1972). *See Annex 3*. The Act permits
government agencies to establish and utilize committees for the purpose
of obtaining collective or consensual advice or recommendations on
issues or policies within the scope of the agencies responsibilities. A
few key requirements are balance in terms of membership with charters
approved by GSA and filed with Congress. TAC is not empowered to
establish regulations. It can be terminated after two years , but is
renewable for successive two year periods. A key consideration is that
meetings must be open to the public and called and convened by the DFO
or Alternate DFO. A DFO must be present at all meetings. There must also
be 15 days advance notice and public notice published in the Federal
Register. TAC should not plan on having any closed meetings or impromptu
closed sessions. All deliberations, consensus building and decision
making must be made in the open. Records and documents, such as
transcripts of meetings, minutes, appendices, working papers, etc., must
be available for public inspection and copying. The FCC TAC Web pages
will serve this purpose.

Working groups (subcommittees, focus groups, etc.) are convened to
gather information, develop work plans, perform studies, do research,
collect data, draft reports, and discuss preliminary findings. They are
not considered advisory committee meetings and thus not subject to the
Public Notice and Open Meetings requirements of FACA unless they are:
large enough to constitute a quorum that could form a consensus for the
parent committee; function as the parent advisory committee by making
decision; make consensual proposals that would be binding on the parent
committee or would function as the parent committee\'s own
recommendation without debate; or provide recommendations directly to
the agency.

Because real time "chat rooms" on the Internet could potentially become
large enough to constitute a quorum (12 members for TAC), we should not
use this vehicle but will use open web pages instead.

It is also noted that FACA requirements do not apply to meetings where
the intent is to solicit experiential or anecdotal information \-- where
there is no consensus advice or recommendations from the group expected
or solicited at the meeting.

Finally, all current TAC members fall within the category of
"representatives." As representatives they are not subject to certain
government-wide conflict of interest, ethical and financial *disclosure*
requirements.

Violations of the FACA rules can result in the FCC\'s inability to use
TAC reports or rely on TAC information or recommendations in
decision-making. This overview is merely to make TAC members aware of
some key issues. The FCC staff will be made available for expert advice.
Contacts are listed in Annex 3.

6.  Requests From the Federal Communications Commission to the
    Technological Advisory Council

The FCC has requested that the Technological Advisory Council commence
work in the following five subject areas:

I. SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT

REQUEST: Please assess and report to the Commission the current state of
the art for software defined radios, cognitive radios, and similar
devices and, to the extent possible, predict future developments for
these technologies. Please also suggest ways that the availability of
such devices might affect the FCC's traditional approaches to spectrum
management, as well as ways the agency could facilitate experimentation
and commercial deployment of such devices.

BACKGROUND: Historically, in the U.S. the range of usable frequencies
for communications between 30 MHz and 300 GHz has been divided between
federal government exclusive use (1.42%), non-federal exclusive use
(5.52%) and shared use (93.1%). Of the most heavily used frequencies
between 30 MHz and 3 GHz, 14% are federal government exclusive, 30% are
non-federal exclusive and 53% are shared. Within this overall structure,
blocks of radio frequencies have also been designated (allocated) both
domestically and internationally for the provision of specific services
such as fixed, mobile, broadcast, satellite, maritime mobile, et al. The
Commission, while adopting more flexible spectrum use allocations, has
also identified unique frequency ranges for specific types of services
and has established technical parameters and other rules to govern
operations on designated frequencies. Manufacturers and service
providers, in turn, developed products and systems that conformed to
those requirements.

At the Commission\'s recent En Banc Spectrum Management Hearing on April
6, 1999, several panelists suggested that the Commission\'s current
approach to spectrum management may prevent spectrum from being used in
the most efficient manner. New developments that were identified by
panelists included software defined radios, cognitive radios,
next-generation unlicensed devices, and ultra wide-band wireless
technologies. Several panelists also suggested that radical rethinking
and changes to current spectrum management polices are essential if the
American public is to benefit from the technologies that are being
developed in this country and if the United States is to continue to be
a world leader in communications. These suggestions included proposals
that the Commission investigate much more decentralized forms of
spectrum management where intelligence in the end user devices would
play a much larger role in ensuring efficient use of spectrum.

II\. ELECTROMAGNETIC NOISE

REQUEST: Please assess and report to the Commission the current state of
knowledge on electromagnetic noise levels and the effects of such noise
on the reliability of existing and future communications systems, and
recommend whether the FCC should pay closer attention to electromagnetic
noise issues. If electromagnetic noise is a significant concern, please
suggest technical approaches for obtaining sufficient information on the
subject.

BACKGROUND: Electromagnetic noise and interference limit the performance
of all communications systems. The external electromagnetic noise
environment is composed of both natural noise sources (including
extraterrestrial, i.e., galactic and solar, as well as atmospheric
sources) and man-made sources.[^1] Two major sources of man-made noise
are electric power transmission and distribution lines, and automobile
ignition systems; other man-made sources include rotating electrical
machinery, switching devices, appliances, light dimmers, arc generating
devices.[^2] In addition, radio systems can emit harmonics and other
spurious emissions that can cause interference to other communications
systems.

The U.S. civilian government has not systematically assessed
electromagnetic noise levels since a limited study over 20 years
ago.[^3] During this interim, the commercially viable range of radio
frequency devices has significantly expanded.[^4] Our understanding of
noise levels in these newly utilized bands is incomplete. Adding to the
uncertainty is the existence of only limited academic or empirical
studies elsewhere on the state of the noise floor.[^5] A recent Canadian
study suggests relative stability in the noise floor over the past 20
years,[^6] a fact which, if true, may be attributable to a significant
decrease in noise contributions from power lines and automobiles over
this period. Anecdotal evidence, however, suggests a rising level of
radio frequency noise, perhaps attributable to the proliferation of
consumer devices.

The regulatory limitations the Commission places on intentional and
unintentional emissions are premised on long-standing assumptions about
the relative ambient environmental noise. Given the dated nature of the
Commission\'s knowledge underlying those assumptions, as new and
innovative radio communications devices emerge it is becoming
increasingly important that the Commission base its decisions on a
reliable assessment of the noise floor within the United States and its
territories. In examining technical limitations, the Commission must
determine whether certain restrictive limitations should be relaxed
because the incremental noise contribution is insufficient to justify
the economic and innovation burdens associated with the restrictions, or
whether certain limitations should be continued or even increased
because the incremental noise increase could impair the efficacy of
existing systems.

As we head into the next millennium and as the Commission grapples with
new and innovative communications technologies, it is essential that the
Commission better understand the state of the current noise floor, the
direction electromagnetic noise is headed in the overall environment,
and the impact of radio emissions on the efficacy of telecommunications
systems.

III\. ACCESS TO TELECOMMUNICATIONS BY PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES

REQUEST: Please evaluate the current technical trends in
telecommunications services and report to the Commission any changes
that might decrease, rather than increase, the accessibility of
telecommunications services by persons with disabilities. Please also
recommend how the FCC might best communicate to designers of emerging
telecommunications network architectures, the requirements for
accessibility.

BACKGROUND: Telecommunications networks in the United States are going
through major technological changes. These changes include shifts from
analog to digital transmission, from circuit switching to packet
switching, from narrowband to broadband, from intelligence and control
within the network to more intelligence and control in powerful
processors at the edge of the network, and from wired to wireless
communications in many applications.

As observers have pointed out, these developments hold out the promise
of significantly increasing the ability of people with disabilities to
access and use information more readily and to interact more widely with
all members of society. Properly applied, the technology can make their
disabilities invisible or irrelevant and thereby allow them to more
fully participate in, and contribute their talents to, the community at
large. On the other hand, these technological developments can prevent
persons with certain disabilities from gaining access to needed
information, from using the information, and from communicating more
readily. A key provision of 1996 Act is Section 255, which addresses the
needs of the 54 million Americans with disabilities by requiring
telecommunications service providers to ensure that service is
accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities, if readily
achievable.

IV\. NETWORK INTERCONNECTION

REQUEST: Please assess and report to the Commission, from a
technical/economic perspective, telecommunications common carrier
network interconnection scenarios that are likely to develop.
Descriptions of these scenarios should include the technical aspects of
cross network (i.e., end-to-end) interconnection, quality of service,
network management, reliability, and operations issues, as well as the
deployment of new technologies such as dense wave division multiplexing
and high speed packet/cell switching.

BACKGROUND: One key to the explosive growth of the Internet has been
widespread interconnection through open interfaces. A central part of
the Telecommunications Act of 1996 was directed to creating competition
to incumbent local exchange carriers (\"ILECs\") by requiring network
interconnection and network interoperability. In particular, Section
251(a) of the Act requires all common carriers to interconnect and
Section 251(c) imposes additional interconnection obligations on ILECs,
including the requirement that ILECs interconnect with other carriers at
any technically feasible point. Section 256 of the Act charges the
Commission with the responsibility of taking appropriate steps, on a
continuing basis, to ensure that appropriate planning will occur in
order to achieve interoperability among different networks.

Today, the Commission addresses the interconnection of circuit switched
voice networks of ILECs with other local exchange carriers and
interexchange carriers through detailed regulations, and the Commission
regulates the interconnection of point-to-point private lines among
ILECs and other carriers in a similar manner. In contrast, the
Commission has chosen not to impose identical regulations concerning the
interconnection of Internet protocol networks, and the Commission has
not yet been called upon to impose technical regulations that are
uniquely directed to the issues that are associated with optical
interconnection.

The exploding demand for bandwidth, together with rapid advances in
optical and other telecommunications technologies, imply that the
technical interconnection issues of tomorrow may be very different from
those that the Commission has addressed in the past. In the future, the
Commission will be called upon to decide where competitive market
forces, rather than regulation, will meet the requirements of the Act.
If market forces are not then sufficient to address the Act\'s
requirements in one or more areas, the Commission will then have to
determine how best to address that issue.

V. NETWORK ACCESS

REQUEST: Please assess and report to the Commission the technical
viability and likely time frames for the future availability of
broadband access technologies to small businesses and residences, both
in rural as well as urban/suburban areas. Please include assessments of
digital subscriber lines using twisted pair copper loops, cable modem
technology, optical fiber to the customer, broadband terrestrial
wireless, satellite, digital power line, and other broadband access
technologies. Please also identify any impediments that may exist to the
successful deployment of each of these broadband access technologies.
Please address both the physical transport of information between the
customer and an external network and the logical control and signaling
structure (including functions related to customer service and network
management) associated with those functions.

BACKGROUND: Section 706 of the 1996 Telecommunications Act (\"Act\")
charges the Commission with determining the extent to which advanced
telecommunications capabilities are available to all Americans and, as
appropriate, with taking pro-active steps to ensure deployment of
advanced telecommunications capabilities throughout the United States.
On January 29, 1999, the Commission submitted its first report on this
subject to Congress. The report concluded that competitive market forces
were working quite well for medium to large business markets,
particularly in large metropolitan areas. The report further concluded
that there was evidence that the deployment of advanced
telecommunications capabilities to small businesses, residential
Americans, and rural America was beginning, but that the deployment of
advanced services to those customers would need careful monitoring to
determine whether action by the Commission should be taken in the
future.

To enable the Commission to assess more accurately how it should
prioritize resources to achieve broadband access to all Americans, the
Commission needs a thorough and accurate assessment of all new access
technologies, particularly with respect to those access technologies
that promise \"break-through\" performance.

To place this issue in perspective, when the Act was drafted in the
mid-1990\'s, contemporary speculation suggested that video on demand
from telephone companies and cable telephony from cable companies would
lead to rapid local competition in both narrowband and broadband
services. At the same time, however, little apparent effort was devoted
to analyzing the effect of the Internet on the provision of, and demand
for, narrowband and broadband access services.

Today, the United States is faced with a dramatic range of new
technologies (including Internet based technologies) that have the
potential to provide both broadband and narrowband access. Understanding
these technologies \-- and what the FCC can do to enable viable access
technologies to thrive \-- is essential to enabling the Commission to
address its statutory mandate successfully.

Note that in FCC 99-5, the Report to Congress on Advanced
Telecommunications Capabilities, that the Commission observed that the
record, while sparse, suggests that multiple methods of increasing
bandwidth are or soon will be made available to a broad range of
customers. On that basis, the Commission sees no reason to take action
at this time on the issue of writing regulations related to
interconnection among broadband access systems offered by cable
operators and Internet service providers nor among Internet service
providers.

7.  Summary of Roundtable Discussion of Issues

Following the presentation of the FCC requests, members of the TAC
roundtable discussed each issue. Results of that discussion are
distilled and organized here to serve as a basis for future work. It is
the intention of the summaries to reflect the individual views of the
various TAC members, rather than represent a consensus per se.

#### 7.1 Spectrum Management

Current regulation of the electromagnetic spectrum, which assumes a
fundamental scarcity of this resource, is implemented by assigning
specific portions of the spectrum to a specific use. TAC should explore
those new technologies which might allow the FCC to update this
regulatory model so as to promote more efficient usage. In particular,
there is anecdotal evidence that at any given time and place typically
only a small portion of the radio spectrum is in active use, and for
those channels that are in use, only a few are limited by the background
noise level. In principal, therefore, it should be technologically
possible to make greater use of the spectrum by exploiting these
presumably unmined dimensions.

New technologies have been proposed to capitalize on these observations.
Intelligent software-defined and controlled radios (e.g., cognitive
radios) reportedly can dynamically seek out and inoffensively use
otherwise unoccupied pieces of spectrum. Ultrawideband radios add new
channels with very broadly spread signals. Ultrawideband thus not only
reclaims otherwise unused spectrum but, by slightly raising the
background noise level, reuses spectrum in active use by others. The FCC
request for information on the status and impact of background noise
from both intentional and unintentional sources will directly impact the
future of ultrawideband. Some of the other points made by the TAC
roundtable were:

-   A systematic assessment of what is known about the current
    background noise level is required, together with an analysis of the
    effect of noise level on different systems. It will probably be
    necessary to recommend a measurement program.

-   The roles of regulation and standards need to be revisited. New
    technology is removing much of the scarcity which motivated current
    regulation, while standards for new types of digital radios and
    modulation systems, if not properly configured, could severely
    impact our ability to make more efficient use of the spectrum. These
    issues are not constrained to the USA but require global
    harmonization.

-   We need a complete inventory of all of the technologies beyond
    simple frequency division which allow sharing of the spectrum
    between various services and applications. For those techniques
    which result in incompatibilities with current or other proposed
    uses, technological fixes should be catalogued. Experiments should
    be proposed to resolve ambiguities and validate assumptions.

-   What services will be enabled and what will be the value of the
    public benefit from increasing the available bandwidth?

-   There is a broad range of reliabilities, blocking probabilities and
    communications dropout rates required for different applications.
    How do metrics for these parameters relate to the various protocols
    and etiquettes that may be proposed? How do we take quality of
    service into account? Can mission critical applications ever share
    spectrum with less sensitive uses?

-   Although the isolated application of technologies such as
    ultrawideband may be relatively innocuous, the scaling laws for high
    usage must be well understood before widespread use is sanctioned.
    Management algorithms and etiquettes based on scaling laws and
    interference effects will need to be promulgated. Experience with
    resource sharing in the Internet will be invaluable.

-   When multiple users share the same band, the noise floor for all
    users rises and the cost which might rightfully be attributable to
    one of the users is, in effect, transferred to another. "There is no
    free lunch". For heavily occupied portions of the spectrum, it is
    still questionable if a net long term gain in capacity will actually
    be achieved if some of the newer technologies are deployed on a very
    large scale. Spectral sharing may also impinge on the property
    interests of spectrum obtained at auction. Can a responsible
    transition plan be proposed?

-   Intelligent devices such as cognitive radios could be programmed to
    locate themselves in space and time, consult databases, measure the
    local environment, and select from menus of power levels bandshapes
    and coding techniques to fit the available spectral space. Complex
    management stratagems could be implemented so as to harmonize with
    other users with other priorities or requiring different qualities
    of service. Signals could be designed so the origin could be located
    , identified and be held accountable. With the speculation of all of
    this functionality, TAC must give to the FCC technologically
    defensible assessments of feasibility, timescale, complexity and
    futureproofness so that new regulatory concepts will be soundly
    based.

Finally, understanding and measurement of the noise floor could lead to
a relaxation of Part 15 requirements to the benefit of implementers of
circuits of all kinds.

##### 7.2 Access to Telecommunications by Persons With Disabilities 

A possible and beneficial outcome of a TAC analysis of this problem
would a comprehensive set of "awareness points" against which new
designs could be measured. The objective would be to incent designers of
new equipment to consider at the conception stage how all products would
be used by persons operating under constrained conditions. This would
not only minimize the need for (and cost of ) ancillary assistive
apparatus by persons with disabilities, but make the products more
valuable to the general population. Television closed captions are an
example of an assistive introduced to compensate for a disability but
found to be more generally useful by everyone.

-   The Commission is required by statute to take special action
    relative to people with disabilities. Because some of these issues
    relate to the design of customer equipment, and because of
    differences in the scope of regulation for different communications
    modalities, the FCC will have to carefully define the terms of
    reference for this work.

-   There is the general feeling that as we evolve to a new
    infrastructure, many of the difficulties of adaptation for the
    disabled can be avoided if the problem space is correctly
    articulated in advance so designers will have clear objectives.

-   There are many categories of people requiring assistance (e.g.,
    visual, hearing, etc.) and many citizens have multiple disabilities.
    If we add to this requirement benefits to the nondisabled, it makes
    good economic sense for designers to consider how their products
    will be used by all persons who may be operating under constrained
    conditions.

-   There is an ongoing concern that as new technology is introduced the
    problems of the disabled will be magnified. As an example, cooking
    range adjustments using pushbuttons coupled to digital readbacks
    instead of tactile rotary knobs are unusable by the blind, and could
    be the forerunner of all appliance controls. Conversely, the
    introduction of new technology could be the vehicle for vastly
    easing the problems of the disabled.

-   TAC should recommend what needs to be accomplished and not how to do
    it. TAC could consider how one might structure (for products or
    infrastructure systems) a "Usage by the Disabled Impact Statement."

-   As America's population ages, it is likely that most of us will
    become citizens with disabilities.

7.3 Network Interconnection and Access

Fairly implemented competition can solve most problems, but we have
found that rules are required to efficiently define interfaces between
entities if the playing field is to be made universally accessible. The
problem of defining interconnection points and protocols is exacerbated
by the proliferation of new technologies, nonequivalent architectures,
and an ever expanding set of service requirements. TAC should provide
guidance to the FCC on the efficacy of (and special issues created by)
new technology which may be introduced both in access and core networks
of all types (wireline, fiber, wireless satellite, etc.)

-   The Internet has replaced regulation with competition. It created
    interoperability and fostered competition by defining a minimalist
    interface at the lowest possible level for the purpose. This is a
    good model, but we should recall how this structure grew from the
    greenhouse of the Arpanet.

-   We should structure results so as little regulation of
    interconnections as possible is required. Only interfaces that are
    universal in a simple way and relatively agnostic to technological
    evolution are likely to be viable. We want to enable competition
    among totally different kinds of infrastructure.

-   A good model for interconnection rules would probably include the
    minimum level of specification at each logical layer needed to
    insure interoperability. Specifications, for instance, at just the
    physical layer would be inadequate if service guarantees required
    signaling interchange also. By the same token, it should be possible
    to interconnect systems without exposing all the layers, or with
    some upper layers missing.

-   Interconnection standards should allow for the compatible insertion
    of unique proprietary elements so that the entire market will not
    become commoditized. Standards which permit multiple options to
    achieve exactly the same result should be avoided . Rather than
    promoting freedom, alternate modes usually hinder progress by adding
    cost and creating confusion

-   When voice was the only service, universal service was easy to
    understand. Voice now is just a data type. We need to explore the
    options for defining what we mean by universal access. If groups of
    services are bundled or provided by nonregulated technologies, the
    cross-subsidy structure built into current regulations will need
    revisiting. TAC should confine its deliberations to technical
    issues, but these issues inevitable have policy considerations that
    we need to be aware of.

8.  Procedure for technical work

Members of TAC are invited by the FCC as individuals to participate as
volunteers. They may not be represented by alternates on the TAC,
however, anyone may attend the open meetings as a member of the public.

##### Work items are initiated by written requests from the FCC. TAC members or the public may suggest new items for the Commission's consideration. After initial presentation and roundtable discussion at a regular TAC meeting, focus groups are established with a designated "moderator" to continue work on one or more of the requests. Individual TAC members may volunteer for any focus group. Each focus group establishes a publicly viewable web site so work in progress can be posted by the moderator. A first task for each moderator is to propose the "terms of reference" for the group. The FCC will modify the terms of reference for the work that will be performed, as appropriate. That document, after iteration and approval by the DFO, defines the scope of work for the group and the expected deliverables.

##### Moderators may choose to create subgroups or consult outside experts for input. It is expected that certain preliminary work will involve personal communications, but every effort will be taken to assure openness via the website as documents reach maturity. In any case, work of the focus groups will be nonbinding input to the full TAC which, after open discussion, will be responsible for recommendations to the FCC. These recommendations, which may contain a spectrum of opinions, will take the form of annotated viewgraphs with supporting documentation. 

9.  Additional issues suggested by the group

-   What effect will new technology have on reliability? What critical
    infrastructure protection issues should be addressed?

-   What techniques are available to provide universal number
    portability across *all* systems?

-   What special problems might arise from nontraditional forms of
    infrastructure, such as atmospheric platforms?

-   What advice can we give to the FCC in dealing with issues which are
    so intrinsically complex that total knowledge becomes impossible?

-   How should we approach the total globalization and emerging
    borderless nature of telecom?

-   What does technology enable in the area of privacy preservation and
    trust management?

10. Going forward plan

Focus Groups have been formed with moderators designated. *See Annex 4*.
Moderators should propose exact terms of reference immediately for DFO
approval. Work plans for each group should be established targeted for
initial readout at the next general meeting, scheduled for September 22,
1999. There is a specific request that more complete findings on
spectrum management be available by the September meeting so the FCC can
start a Notice of Inquiry. It is expected that the total Council will
meet formally approximately three times per year.

***Prepared by* J. A. Bellisio**

***Approved by* R.W. Lucky**

> ***May 26,1999***

### Annex 1: Meeting Videotape

A VHS videotape of the April 30,1999 meeting serves as a set of
comprehensive minutes of that meeting. Copies of the tape can be
obtained from the Commission\'s contracted copier, ITS. It can be
reached through ITS' web page.

[http://www.itsdocs.com](http://www.itsdocs.com/)

or by phone at 202-857-3800

### Annex 2: Biographies of members 

####### BRUCE M. ALLAN

*Vice President and General Manager*

*Harris Corporation*

(bio not available at this time)

ballan@harris.com

JOSE M. ALVAREZ CABAN

*Assistive Technology Specialist*

*Puerto Rico Assistive Technology Project*

Mr. Alvarez is an Assistive Technology Specialist working for the Puerto
Rico Assistive Technology Project (project sponsored by RESNA) at the
University of Puerto Rico, Medical Science Campus. He deals with issues
of accessibility of telecommunications for Spanish speaking persons with
disabilities and their special need to access different types of
technologies. He also advises the Puerto Rico Government, Communications
Central Office in accessibility aspects for persons with disabilities in
their implementation of the Puerto Rico information System (PRIS). He
also writes guidelines to make the government's web pages accessible to
blind and handicapped individuals. Jose also advises the Puerto Rico
Government, Education Department, Technology Committee on computer
accessibility for students with disabilities in all public schools in
Puerto Rico, which includes adaptation of computers and software to be
accessible for students with special needs; Bank Popular de Puerto Rico
on accessibility aspects for their consumers with disabilities in their
ATM machines, electronic banking software, and its web page; University
of Puerto Rico on accessibility aspects related to its web page and
students with disabilities. Mr. Alvarez also gives training and seminars
to persons with disabilities, parents of persons with disabilities,
related professionals and government office employees related to
accessibility and Assistive Technology. Mr. Alvarez is currently working
on a Master's degree thesis that is related to accessibility of visual
technologies (like ATM machines, Windows GUI Operating Systems and
Internet web pages) for blind persons. He is part of the W3C mailing
list group and the SIG 19 Committee.

Jose, who is legally blind, represents the interest of Hispanic
consumers with disabilities and special needs by making recommendations
to companies and providers of telecommunications equipment and services
to improve their accessibility for persons with disabilities. He has
designed a Spanish web page specially to help handicapped individuals
access the Internet and other types of technologies. The web page has
been in several news stations, recently appearing in the BBC news agency
of Londres and was reviewed for its accessibility information for
persons with disabilities to access new technologies in Spanish
language. The web site is:
[**http://home.coqui.net/jalvarez/**](http://home.coqui.net/jalvarez/).
Mr. Alvarez also writes computer programs designed for blind
individuals, which are in Spanish, to help blind individuals overcome
their English language barrier (most Assistive Technology software is in
English).

jalvarez@coqui.net

***JULES A. BELLISIO***

***Chief Scientist and Fellow-Executive Director, Applied Research***

***Telcordia Technologies( formerly Bellcore)***

Jules A. Bellisio, Chief Scientist and Executive Director, Applied
Research, Telcordia Technologies, manages the research program as it
relates to emerging networks. During his engineering career, which
started in 1962 at Bell Telephone Laboratories and has included design
for manufacture as well as exploratory development, he has worked on a
broad spectrum of electronic and transmission problems ranging from data
modems to lightwave systems. At Bell System divestiture, he joined
Bellcore to establish the Digital Signal Processing Research Division.
In his current assignment, he is developing many of Telcordia\'s next
generation consulting and engineering opportunities, especially in the
area of wireless. He is the originator of the \"sliding payload\"
concept central to SONET/SDH transmission systems, invented the
phase-frequency locked timing extractor widely used in baseband digital
repeaters, and was the principal engineer of the digital television
lightwave system used for most of the contribution quality TV feeds at
the 1984 Olympic Games. Bellisio and his staff have made key
contributions to Broadband/ATM standardization and to HDTV, video
compression and ADSL systems

Bellisio was born in Brooklyn, New York; he received the BSEE degree
from the Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn, the SMEE degree from the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and was awarded the Ph.D. from
Yale University. Dr. Bellisio is a Telcordia Fellow, a Fellow of the
IEEE, a member of the Society of Motion Picture and Television
Engineers, and a member of the European Association for Signal
Processing. Jules and his wife Carol, a college professor, live in rural
New Jersey and have three daughters.

> jules@research.telcordia.com

VINTON G. CERF

*Senior Vice President, Internet Technology and Architecture*

*MCI WorldCom*

Vinton Cerf, also known as "Father of the Internet," is Sr. Vice
President of Internet and Architecture and Technology. His team of
architects and engineers design advanced Internet frameworks for
delivering a combination of data, information, voice and video services
for business and consumer use. Prior to rejoining MCI, Mr. Cerf was vice
president of the Corporation of National Research Initiatives (CNRI),
vice president of MCI Digital Information Services where he led the
engineering of MCI Mail, and prior to that Vinton was with the U.S.
Department of Defense's Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), where
he played a key role leading the development of Internet and
Internet-related data packet and security technologies. He holds a
Bachelor of Science in Mathematics from Stanford University, Master of
Science and Ph.D. in Computer Science from UCLA, honorary doctorate
degrees from Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich; Lulea
University of Technology, Sweden; University of the Balearic Island,
Palma; Capitol College and Gettysburg College. Cerf also holds an
appointment as distinguished visiting scientist at the Jet Propulsion
Laboratory, where he is working on the design of an interplanetary
Internet.

Mr. Cerf was previously the founding President of the Internet Society,
and now serves as its Chairman of the Board. He is also a member of the
U.S. Presidential Information Technology Advisory Committee (PITAC) and
the Advisory Committee for Telecommunications (ACT) in Ireland, on the
Board of Directors for the Endowment for Excellence in Education,
Gallaudet University, Interprophet and Hybrithms Corporations and is a
fellow of the IEEE, ACM, and American Association for the Advancement of
Science, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and the National
Academy of Engineering. Mr. Cerf is the co-designer of the TCP/IP
protocol. In December 1997, Mr. Cerf and his partner, Robert E. Kahn,
received the U.S. National Medal of Technology for founding and
developing the Internet. He is also the recipient of Marconi Fellowship,
the Alexander Graham Bell Award, the NEC Computer and Communications
Prize, the Silver Medal of the International Telecommunications Union,
the IEEE Alexander Graham Bell Medal, the IEEE Koji Kobayashi Award, the
ACM Software and Systems Award, the ACM SIGCOMM Award, the Computer and
Communications Industries Association Industry Legend Award, the Yuri
Rubinsky Web Award, the Kilby Award and the Yankee Group/Interop/Network
World Lifetime Achievement Award.

vcerf@mci.net

SUSAN E. ESTRADA\
*President & Founder\
Aldea Communications, Inc.*

Susan Estrada an innovator and entrepreneur, an Internet pioneer, was
named a \"thinking nerd\" by colleagues. Seeking to support growth of
the Internet, Susan founded Aldea Communications, Inc. in July 1993.
Aldea\'s focus is on strategic Internet communications strategies. It
provides professional and technical services to its clients which
include CENIC, the University of California, California State
University, Hughes, AT&T InterNIC, Network Solutions, Cisco Systems,
AT&T Jens, Pacific Bell, and Bell South. In addition to client services,
Susan focuses on seeking out research and development opportunities for
Aldea with regard to the future Internet. She has a deep interest in
emerging Internet technologies and making those technologies work to
solve real‑world problems. Current areas of interest include allocating,
accounting, and billing in a QoS‑enabled Internet. Aldea's current
projects focus on higher education and the next generation Internet.
Susan, along with other Aldea\'s staff, is providing administrative and
technical support services to The Consortium for Education Network
Initiatives in California (CENIC), which includes working with
knowledgeable technical folks at CENIC's universities to develop plans
for research and design of its high performance network, CalREN‑2. Aldea
created the content and design for the web sites *InterNIC Academic
Guide to the Internet* and the *InterNIC Guide to U.S. Universities*
under AT&T\'s InterNIC Directory and Database Services NSF cooperative
agreement.

Susan wrote *Connecting to the Internet, An O\'Reilly Buyer\'s Guide*,
in August 1993 (a Barnes and Noble bestseller.) Susan founded CERFnet,
an Internet service provider, in 1988. During her 5-year tenure as the
CERFnet executive director, she was instrumental in CERFnet\'s user
growth from 25 university members to hundreds of corporate members and
thousands of individual users. CERFnet developed a number of notable
firsts for the Internet including the first deployment of dialup IP,
accounting reports for customers, interconnection enabling commercial
traffic via the CIX, and high quality service. She currently is an
elected Trustee of the Internet Society and an appointed member of
Pacific Telesis\'s Telecommunications Consumer Advisory Panel (TCAP) and
the U.S. Federal Networking Council's Advisory Committee (FNCAC). Susan
was a founder of the Commercial Internet Exchange (CIX), on the U.S.
Federal Networking Council\'s Advisory Committee (FNCAC), and a former
area director for the Internet Engineering Software Group (IESG) and the
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). She is listed in the 1998‑1999
Edition of *Who\'s Who in Executives and Professionals*. As a parent of
two children, Susan is strongly committed to enhancing educational
programs using communications technology. Susan played an instrumental
role by co‑founding the Global Schoolhouse and organizing the California
branch of Tech Corps.

sestrada@aldea.com

BRAN FERREN

*President, R&D and Creative Technology Walt Disney Imagineering*

Bran Ferren is President, R&D and Creative Technology Walt Disney
Imagineering, a new resource for new technology invention and creative
input for the entire company. Ferren's responsibilities, which include a
broad range of assignments, also include overseeing all R&D activities
on both coasts. Mr. Ferren is a nationally recognized award-winning
designer/technologist working in theater, film, special effects, product
design, architecture and the sciences. Prior to his current position,
Mr. Ferren was a consultant to Walt Disney Imagineering while heading
his own firm founded in 1978, Associates & Ferren. The company
specialized in research and development, creative design, engineering,
and execution of projects and systems for the visual and performing
arts, as well as for industry and the sciences. A&F became a part of
Walt Disney Imagineering in 1992.

Mr. Ferren attended Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He holds
memberships on the Government-University-Industry Research Roundtable of
the National Academy of Sciences and the International Design Conference
in Aspen's (IDCA) Board of Directors. He is also a member of the Army
Science Board, The National Reconnaissance Organization Advisory
Council, the National Security Agency Science Advisory Board, the Senate
Select Committee on Intelligence Technical Advisory Group, and is also a
voting member of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences and the
Academy of Television Arts and Sciences. Bran has won numerous awards
for his work in film and theater, including the Academy of Motion
Picture Arts and Sciences, the New York Drama Desk, the Los Angeles
Critics' Circle and the Maharam Foundation Annual Theater. Also, a
popular guest lecturer, Mr. Ferren has addressed over 100 professional
groups in the entertainment, business and scientific community.

bran@disney.com

RICHARD R. GREEN

*President & CEO*

*CableLabs*

Dr. Green is President and CEO of CableLabs and has held this position
since CableLabs' establishment in 1988 as an R&D consortium of cable
operators. In his current position, he heads the organization
responsible for charting the cable television industry's course in
technology.

Dr. Green is a member of Phi Beta Kappa, the American Association for
the Advancement of Science, and the Society of Motion Picture and TV
Engineers. He holds a B.S. from Colorado College, a M.S. in physics from
the State University of New York in Albany, and a Ph.D. from the
University of Washington.

Lkelly@cablelabs.com

CHRISTINE HEMRICK

*Vice President, Technology Communications*

*Cisco Systems, Inc.*

Christine Hemrick is Vice President of Technology Communications,
responsible for strategic technology planning and communications at
Cisco Systems, Inc. She has also held a number of other positions at
Cisco, which included Director of IOS Marketing and Vice President and
General Manager of the Internet Appliances and Applications Business
Unit. Prior to joining Cisco, she was District Manager for Data
Communications Planning at Telcordia Technologies, formerly Bellcore;
Senior Staff member at the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA) of the U.S. Department of Commerce; served as Head
of the U.S. delegation to the CCITT Study Group VII, responsible for
international data communications standards such as X.25, X.400, and
Open Systems Interconnection. Before joining NTIA, Ms. Hemrick also held
positions at GTE Telenet (now Sprint) and Digital Equipment Corporation.

Ms. Hemrick has achieved peer recognition as a technical expert. Her
experience working on technical issues both for the government and for
different segments of the telecommunications industry give her the kind
of broad perspective necessary to develop an integrated approach to the
convergence of once-distinct services. As a member of the Council, she
will represent the interest of high technology companies (such as Cisco)
that are designing, constructing, and deploying equipment for advanced
telecommunications systems, especially those involving packet-mode
communications.

hemrick@cisco.com

DEWAYNE L. HENDRICKS

*General Manager*

*Com21, Inc.*

Dewayne Hendricks is General Manager, Wireless Business Unit at Com21,
Inc. Prior to that, Mr. Hendricks has held the positions of
Founder/President/CEO of Tetherless Access Ltd., Warp Speed
Imagineering; and Veritas Technology, Inc.; Co-principal Investigator
for NSF funded Wireless Field Test Project; Consultant for Premenos
Corp., Apple Computer, IBM, and Clinton Woodworth Associates, and also
Manager of System Software at Two Pi. He has held assignments such as
designed and implemented a TCP/IP package for the Apple Macintosh,
designed and developed a PROFS to Apple Macintosh electronic mail
application; designed a major time-sharing operating system based on
IBM's VM/370; developed the product plan and architecture for a database
back-end processor; designed and developed predecessor of the VM/VS
Handshaking feature in IBM's VM/SP control program among many others.

Mr. Hendricks received a B.S. in Psychology and Mathematics from Wayne
State University in Detroit. He was listed in MicroTimes Magazine's "Top
100 List" and Upside Magazine's "Top 100 People in the Industry." He was
also Chairperson for Tucson Amateur Pack Radio (TAPR) Regulatory Affairs
Committee and the Part 15 Coalition, FCC Regulatory Committee and a
member of American Radio Relay League (ARRL) Future Systems Committee.

dewayne@com21.com

ROSS IRELAND

*Vice President, Network Planning & Engineering*

*SBC Operations, Inc.*

Mr. Ross Ireland is Vice President, Network Planning & Engineering. Mr.
Ireland has extensive experience as a technologist with 30 years of
Communications Operating and Engineering background. He is Chief
Engineer for the SBC 8-state wireline communications business including
switching, transport, loop planning and engineering. He has also served
as Chairman of the first Network Reliability Steering Committee.

ross@pacbell.com

CHARLES L. JACKSON

Independent Consultant

Before becoming an independent consultant, Dr. Jackson was staff
engineer for the Communications Subcommittee of the U.S. House of
Representatives; special assistant to the Chief of the Common Carrier
Bureau and engineering assistant to Commissioner Robinson at the Federal
Communications Commission. He has also worked as a digital designer and
computer programmer. After leaving government, Dr. Jackson cofounded
both the telecommunications consulting firm of Shooshan & Jackson Inc.,
whose practice was later combined with that of National Economic
Research Associates, Inc., and Strategic Policy Research, Inc. Dr.
Jackson has served as an expert witness in litigation on cellular
telephony, cable television, and other telecommunications and computer
issues and has testified before several state utility commissions and
before Congress on technology and telecommunications policy. He has
authored or co-authored numerous studies on public policy issues in
telecommunications and has written for professional journals and the
general press, with articles appearing in publications ranging from *The
IEEE Transactions on Computers* to *Scientific American* to *The St.
Petersburg Times*. Over the last several years, he has directed or
participated in projects on acquisition analysis, market planning, and
product pricing. He holds a U.S. patent on an alarm signaling system.

Dr. Charles L. Jackson received a B.A. degree from Harvard College with
honors in applied mathematics and M.S., E.E., and Ph.D. degrees in
electrical engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
At MIT, he specialized in operations research, computer science, and
communications. While a graduate student at MIT, he held the faculty
rank of Instructor, taught graduate operations research courses, and was
codeveloper of an undergraduate course in telecommunications. Dr.
Jackson is a member of the IEEE, the Internet Society, the American
Mathematical Society, and Sigma Xi. He is an adjunct professor of
electrical engineering and computer science at George Washington
University, where he teaches a graduate course in mobile communications.
From 1982 to 1988, he was an adjunct professor at Duke University.

chuck@jacksons.net

KALLE R. KONTSON

*Vice President, IIT Research Institute*

*Division Manager, Center for Electromagnetic Science*

Mr. Kontson is Vice President of IIT Research Institute and Division
Manager for IITRI's Center for Electromagnetic Science in Lanham,
Maryland. His responsibilities include directing projects to apply
advanced spectrum management and digital radio systems technologies to
enhance both commercial and Department of Defense systems performance,
primarily in the areas of spectrum management, spectrum access and
spectrum efficiency. He is a member of the US Army Science Board, and
was recently selected for membership in the Technological Advisory
Council of the Federal Communications Commission.

Mr. Kontson has over 25 years experience in communications theory and
engineering, spectrum engineering, and spectrum management and
automation systems. He has led numerous engineering projects dealing
with commercial wireless telecommunications, including the application
of analysis and design methods to high capacity digital systems for
video and wireless Internet access. Mr. Kontson has a Bachelor of
Science and a Master of Science degree in Electrical Engineering from
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York, and a Juris Doctor
degree from the University of Baltimore School of Law, Baltimore,
Maryland.

kkontson@iitri.org

####### WILLIAM C. Y. LEE

# ***Chief Scientist***

*Air Touch*

**Dr. William C. Y. Lee is Vice President and Chief Scientist of
Strategic Technology at AirTouch Communications. Dr. Lee is recognized
worldwide for developing technologies and standards for the wireless
industry. Dr. Lee joined AirTouch Communications (formerly PacTel Mobile
Companies) in April 1985 to develop improvements in system performance
and capacity. In 1989, Dr. Lee headed the technology team that won the
PCN license in the UK for the AirTouch Consortium. Prior to joining
AirTouch Communications, Dr. Lee worked for ITT Defense Communications
Division (ITTDCD). In his position as senior scientist, he focused on
the development of advanced programs for various military communications
systems. He developed several simulation programs for the multipath
fading medium and applied them to ground mobile communication systems.
In 1982, he was promoted to Manager of the Advanced Development
Department and became responsible for the pursuit of new technologies
for future communication systems. Dr. Lee also worked with Bell
Laboratories and was with the satellite communication research
department where he derived a method to calculate the rain rate
statistics that would affect signal attenuation at 10 GHz and above.
Early in his career, Dr. Lee worked as a research assistant at the
ElectroScience Laboratory at Ohio State University.**

**Dr. Lee received his Ph.D. from Ohio State University in 1963. He was
the founder and co-chairman of CTIA's sub-committee for Advanced Radio
Technologies, Dr. Lee was elected an IEEE Fellow, Radio Club of America
Fellow, and a distinguished alumnus of Ohio State University. He is a
board member of IEEE Vehicular Technology Society. He was named an
honorary professor at both the Beijing University of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, and at the National Chiao Tung University of Taiwan.
Recently he was appointed by the State of California as a member of the
California Council on Science and Technology. He is also a member of the
U.S.A. National Council of Competitiveness. Dr. Lee has received several
distinguished awards which include the Bell Labs Dedicated Service
Award, the ITTDCD Technical Contribution Award, the Ohio State
Distinguished Alumni Award, the IEEE VTS Avant Garde Award, the IEEE
Vehicular Technology Society Service Award and also shared his CDMA
Industry Achievement Award with Dr. Andy Viterbi for his technical
achievements.**

**william.lee@airtouch.com**

PAUL F. LIAO

*Chief Technology Officer and President*

*Panasonic Technologies, Inc.*

Dr. Paul F. Liao is Chief Technology Officer, Matsushita Electric
Corporation of American (d/b/a "Panasonic"), and President, Panasonic
Technologies, Inc. Dr. Liao is responsible for technology direction and
research and development for the Matsushita Group in North America,
including supervision of the corporation's venture capital activity. His
key areas of interest/expertise are telephony and data packet network
systems; digital voice/data networking, storage and systems; television
production, transmission and reception, especially digital and
high-definition TV (broadcast, cable, satellite, etc.); advanced display
technologies; computer networks and advanced communications systems. Dr.
Liao has considerable experience in managing the technical, personnel
and financial resources for success with new products and services. As
senior scientist for a large and diverse manufacturing and marketing
company, Dr. Liao is skilled at distilling and synthesizing complex
information, for both analytical and presentation purposes. Prior to
joining Matsushita and Panasonic, he held a number of positions at Bell
Communications Research (Bellcore) and Bell Laboratories including Vice
President for Emerging Networks; Division Manager for Physics and
Optical Sciences Research, Assistant Vice President of the Solid State
Research Laboratory, the Network Systems Research Laboratory, and the
Network Architecture and Foundations Center. At Bell Laboratories, he
conducted research on nonlinear optics, laser spectroscopy, laser
materials and microstructures, and served as Head of the Quantum
Electronics Research department.

Dr. Liao received a B.S. degree in physics from the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology and a Ph.D. degree in physics from Columbia
University. He has been involved in technology research and management
for over 20 years. Dr. Liao serves on the board of directors of the
Information Technology Industry Council (ITI), and is also a member of
the Board of Directors for several companies affiliated with Matsushita
Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. He also serves as Director for Lightage,
Inc. and has testified before Congress on digital television. He is a
fellow of International Electrical & Electronics Engineers, American
Physical Society, and Optical Society of America. He has been awarded 12
U.S. patents, authored or co-authored more than 75 professional papers,
and participates regularly on a range of industry panels and seminars.
Dr. Liao is a former president of the IEEE Lasers and Electro-Optics
Society, and former editor of the *Journal of the Optical Society of
America B*: *Optical Physics*, and co-editor for the Academic Press
Series entitled *Quantum Electronics* and has served as a member of the
Board of Trustees of Brookdale Community College in Lincroft, NJ.

pliao@research.panasonic.com

Wah L. Lim

*Vice President, Technology and Development*

*Hughes Space & Communications Co.*

Dr. Lim is Vice President for Technology and Development for the world's
leading manufacturer of commercial satellites. He is also integrally
involved in technology issues on behalf of other Hughes Electronics
companies, including DIRECTV and PanAmSat. Prior to joining Hughes, Dr.
Lim was with Loral Space and Communcations, where he was corportate vice
president of technology and operations. Before Loral Space and
Communications, he was with Northrop Corporation, Electronics Systems
Division and before that 10 years were spent with Honeywell.

Dr. Lim born in China, grew up in Singapore, completed a Bachelor of
Science degree in physics, and earned a Ph.D. in theoretical physics at
the University of Minnesota. He is a well-known technical expert in
satellite engineering, operation and construction.

wllim@mail.hac.com

####### ROBERT W. LUCKY

# ***Corporate Vice President -- Applied Research***

######## **Telcordia Technologies**

Robert W. Lucky is Corporate Vice President of Applied Research at
Telcordia Technologies. Prior to his current position, Dr. Lucky started
his career with AT&T Bell Laboratories where he was initially involved
in studying ways of sending digital information over telephone lines. He
then moved through a number of levels from Member of Technical Staff to
become Executive Director of the Communications Sciences Research
Division in 1982, where he was responsible for research on the methods
and technologies for future communication systems. The best known
outcome of this work was his invention of the adaptive equalizer - a
technique for correcting distortion in telephone signals which is used
in all high speed data transmission today. In 1992, he left Bell Labs to
assume his present position at Telcordia Technologies.

Dr. Lucky attended Purdue University, where he received a B.S. degree in
electrical engineering, and M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in 1959 and 1961. Dr.
Lucky is a Fellow of the IEEE and a member of the National Academy of
Engineering. He has been on the advisory boards or committees of many
universities and government organizations, and was Chairman of the
Scientific Advisory Board of the United States Air Force. He served as
President of the Communications Society of the IEEE (Institute of
Electrical and Electronics Engineers), and as Vice President and
Executive Vice President of the parent IEEE itself. He has been editor
of several technical journals, including the Proceedings of the IEEE,
and since 1982 he has written the bimonthly \"Reflections\" column of
personalized observations about the engineering profession in Spectrum
magazine. In 1993 these \"Reflections\" columns were collected in the
IEEE Press book Lucky Strikes \... Again. He is also the author of the
popular book Silicon Dreams, which is a semi-technical and philosophical
discussion of the ways in which both humans and computers deal with
information. He is also a consulting editor for a series of books on
communications through Plenum Press. Dr. Lucky is the holder of 11
patents. He was the 1987 recipient of the prestigious Marconi Prize for
his contributions to data communications; awarded honorary doctorates
from Purdue University and the New Jersey Institute of Technology, and
also awarded the Edison Medal of the IEEE and the Exceptional Civilian
Contributions Medal of the U.S. Air Force. Dr. Lucky is a frequent
speaker before both scientific and general audiences. He has been an
invited lecturer at about one hundred different universities, and has
been the guest on a number of network television shows, including Bill
Moyers\' \"A World of Ideas\".

rlucky@telcordia.com

ROBERT MARTIN

*Chief Technical Officer*

*Bell Labs*

Robert L. Martin is Chief Technical Officer at Bell Labs, the research
and development organization of Lucent Technologies, a leading provider
of telecommunications equipment. Mr. Martin plays a key role in pivotal
technology development and strategy decisions. He is responsible for
evaluating technological innovations in all phases of development and
working to bring them to market quickly. Prior to his position as Chief
Technical Officer, Mr. Martin held key positions in AT&T Network Systems
and Telcordia Technologies, formerly Bellcore. Throughout the industry,
Mr. Martin is widely recognized for his outstanding contributions in
developing UNIX and for his achievements in the development of
telecommunications operations support systems. He is also well regarded
for his work in developing system software for the Safeguard Antimissile
System. Mr. Martin serves as a member of the National Research Council,
principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and
National Academy of Engineering. Because of Mr. Martin's longstanding
contribution in the development of new technologies, he was asked to
testify before the U.S. Senate Science and Technology Caucus Roundtable
in 1997 regarding the role of the federal government in fostering growth
in technology.

Mr. Martin received a Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering from
Brown University and Master of Science and Doctor of Philosophy degrees
in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science from the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology. He also attended the MIT Alfred P. Sloan School
Program for Senior Executives.

> <bobmartin@lucent.com>

DAVID C. NAGEL

*Chief Technology Officer, AT&T Corp.*

*President, AT&T Labs*

David Nagel is President of AT&T Labs, where he is creating a highly
focused and innovative research effort for AT&T and overseeing the
development of a new generation of Internet and other communications and
information services. Also, as AT&T's Chief Technology Officer, Dr.
Nagel advises the AT&T Operations Team and Chairman's Office on
technology issues and chairs a company-wide Technology Strategy and
Development Council. He is also responsible for IP technology
development for AT&T. Prior to joining AT&T, Dr. Nagel was Sr. Vice
President of Apple Computer where he lead its worldwide research and
development group responsible for Macintosh hardware, Mac OS software,
imaging and other peripheral products. Before joining Apple's Advanced
Technology Group in 1988, he was a research scientist and head of human
factors research at NASA's Ames Research Center.

Dr. Nagel holds undergraduate and graduate degrees in engineering and a
doctorate in experimental psychology all from the University of
California, Los Angeles. In addition to a number of national and
international advisory committees, he has served on the National
Critical Technologies Panel and National Research Council Study
Symposium. He is a member of the National Academy of Sciences Committee
on Human Factors, was named to President Clinton's first Advisory
Committee on High Performance Computing, Communication and Next
Generation Internet. He also serves on the Board of Directors of the
Tech Museum of Innovation in San Jose, California and the Kyle
Foundation, and is a member of the Board of Trustees of the UCLA
Foundation.

nagel@ipo.att.com

GLENN REITMEIER

*Vice President, DTV and Web Media*

*Sarnoff Laboratories*

(bio not available at this time)

greitmeier@sarnoff.com

######### DENNIS A. ROBERSON

# ***Corporate Vice President and Chief Technology Officer***

#  ***Motorola***

Dennis Roberson is Corporate Vice President and Chief Technology Officer
at Motorola. He is responsible to the CEO and Management Board for
identifying, articulating, and leading the strategic and visionary
business-based technology advancements that will be the foundation for
the future growth of Motorola. Prior to his current position, Mr.
Roberson joined NCR Corporation in 1994 as Vice President of the
computer product systems unit. He later became Senior Vice President and
Chief Technical Officer where his organization provided technology
strategies and directions for NCR and functional guidance for its
engineering team. Mr. Roberson's career began at AT&T Bell Labs, as a
summer intern, where he designed the first digital display telephone. He
then joined IBM as a logic design engineer in an advance systems
development unit, and a number of projects that led to the development
of the IBM personal computer. In 1986, Mr. Roberson was named Laboratory
Director for the Burlington Laboratory and subsequently headed the
Endicott Laboratory. At IBM he helped develop the first one-megabit
memory chip. In 1988, Dennis joined Digital Equipment Corporation where
he headed various software-related initiatives, serving as Vice
President of Groupware and Vice President of Software.

Roberson graduated from Washington State University with a Bachelors
degree in Electrical Engineering and Physics. He holds a Master of
Science in Electrical Engineering from Stanford. Mr. Roberson serves as
the Chairman of the Technology Policy Committee and the Science Advisory
Board. He has served as the Chairman of the Board for The Open Group,
and chairman of the Computer Systems Policy Project Chief Technology
Officers Committee. He was a member of the Board of Directors and the
Executive Committee of the Information Technology Industry Council
(ITI). He was also a member of the Board of Directors of the South
Carolina Research Institute, the Cultural Council of Richland and
Lexington Counties, the Boy Scott Council, a member of the South
Carolina Technology Advisory Council, the National Visiting Committee
for the South Carolina Center of Excellence for Advanced Technological
Education.

dennis.roberson@motorola.com

MARVIN SIRBU

*Professor*

*Carnegie Mellon University*

(bio not available at this time)

sirbu@cmu.edu

# **GREGG C. VANDERHEIDEN**

*Professor/Director*

*University of Wisconsin-Madison*

Gregg C. Vanderheiden is a Professor in the Industrial Engineering
Department at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and Director of the
Trace Research & Development Center at the University. The Trace Center
is the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center on Information
Technology Access, and a part of the RERC on Universal
Telecommunications Access (both of which are funded by the National
Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research). He is also the
lead investigator for the National Computational Science Alliance's
efforts focused on universal design of computation science and web
infrastructure technologies, and principal investigator on over 100
grants and projects in the area of rehabilitation engineering, access to
national information infrastructure and next generation information
systems, computer access systems, and augmentative communication &
writing systems for children and adults with disabilities. Dr.
Vanderheiden has been working in the area of access to technology for
over 25 years. His early work was in the field of Augmentative
Communication, where he coined much of the terminology, including the
term \"augmentative communication.\" More recently, he has worked with
the computer industry in getting it to build disability access features
directly into their standard products. For example, the Macintosh OS has
had access features since 1987, OS/2 and the UNIX X Window system since
1993, and Windows 95, 98, NT and 2000 have almost a dozen Trace Center
developed features in them. Dr. Vanderheiden\'s research currently
involves the development and testing of guidelines and strategies for
building access directly into the full range of information technologies
and telecommunications systems.

Dr. Vanderheiden received a B.S. in Electrical Engineering from the
University of Wisconsin-Madison (Magna Cum Laude), a M.S. in Biomedical
Engineering Program, and a Ph.D. in Technology in Communication
Rehabilitation and Child Development. He is a member of the Steering
Committee of Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) International Program,
the National Information Standards Office (NISO) Digital Talking Book
Standards Committee, Cost219 bis, a European consortium on ensuring
access to next generation information systems, member of Consortium of
Rehabilitation Engineering Research Organizations, founding member of
International Committee on Accessible Documentation for People with
Print Disabilities (ICADD), amongst numerous others. Dr. Vanderheiden
was a member of the Telecommunications Access Advisory committee and the
Electronic Information Technology Access Advisory Committee for the US
Access Board, and served on the steering committee for the National
Research Council\'s Planning Group on \"Every Citizen Interfaces,\" and
co-authored the NRC\'s More Than Screen Deep Report. At the 6th Annual
International World-Wide-Web Conference in 1997, he was presented with
the Yuri Rubinsky Memorial World Wide Web Award.

gv@trace.wisc.edu

JOHN F. WATERS, JR.

*Vice President, Network Engineering*

*Level 3 Communications, Inc.*

Mr. Waters is Vice President of Engineering, responsible for the
architecture and design of Level 3's transmission and data and voice
networks. Under Mr. Waters' leadership, Level 3 is developing the "soft
switch" that will allow for seamless interconnection between IP networks
and SS7 networks. Prior to his position at Level 3, Mr. Waters was a MCI
Executive Staff member responsible for the architecture, design and
implementation of MCI and Concert's Internet Services. He was also one
of the original key contributors who designed and built MCI's initial
Internet service. Mr. Waters area of expertise is also in the
development of fiber and long haul networks. He has over ten years
experience focusing on engineering and design of Internet technology and
services.

Mr. Waters holds a B.S. in Electrical Engineering from West Virginia
University and a M.S. in Electrical Engineering from John Hopkins
University.

jack.waters@level3.com

PATRICK E. WHITE

Principal, Telecommunications, Information, Media and Electronics
Practice

*Arthur D. Little, Inc.*

Patrick White is a Principal in the Telecommunications, Information,
Media, and Electronics (TIME) Practice at Arthur D. Little, Inc. He is
also affiliated with the Technology and Innovation Management (TIM)
Practice. Mr. White's career spans a broad segment of communications,
from R&D to network operator strategies. Early in his career, he helped
develop the architecture for the fault recovery capability for a
telephone switching system. He later led the software development for
one of the world's first digital voice messaging systems. As part of the
industry focus on fiber in the loop system for broadband entertainment,
his R&D group co-developed the ATM protocol now widely used throughout
the voice and data communications industries. Before joining Arthur D.
Little, Mr. White was a Vice President of Research and Development at
Bell Atlantic Corporation. Mr. White led Bell Atlantic's
telecommunications strategy department and was the principal architect
of the firm's Internet telephony strategy.

Mr. White is a frequent speaker at communications industry events and
has published widely in industry technical journals. He was a past
editor of articles on telecommunications switching systems for the *IEEE
Communications Magazine* and was a guest editor for a special issue of
the *Journal on Selected Areas of Communications* focused on broadband
switching. He holds a Masters Degree and a Ph.D. in Electrical
Engineering from Northwestern University. He is currently a member of
the Advisory Board for the School of Engineering at Northwestern, and a
past member of the Advisory Board for the Telecommunications department
at Michigan State University. He is also distinguished as the first
African American to graduate from Northwestern with a doctorate in
engineering. Mr. White is based in Arlington, Virginia.

white.patrick@adlittle.com

ROBERT M. (BOB) ZITTER

*Senior Vice President, Technology Operations*

*Home Box Office*

Bob Zitter is Senior Vice President, Technology Operations for Home Box
Office in New York. In his position, Bob is responsible for the
company's worldwide distribution, origination, production operations and
engineering. In addition, he oversees HBO's new technology and satellite
interests and focuses on new business development. He was responsible
for the rollout of HBO's satellite encryption in 1985 and for HBO's
introduction of digital compression technology in 1992. He is also one
of the founders of HBO Ole', HBO Hungary and HBO Asia. Prior to joining
HBO, Mr. Zitter was a cable operator and broadcaster with a mid-western
based communications group, and previously supervised network operations
for ABC-TV in New York.

Mr. Zitter has a B.A. degree from Colgate University and a M.B.A. degree
from Frostburg State College in Maryland. He serves on the National
Cable Television Association (NCTA)/Cable Labs Science & Technology
Policy Caucus, the Satellite Broadcasting and Communications Association
(SBCA) Technology Council, North American national Broadcasters
Association Board of Directors, the Advanced Television Systems
Committee, the Television Committee of the Consumer Electronics
Association, and is past president of the Maryland-Delaware Cable
Association. Bob presently serves on the Board of Directors of the North
American National Broadcasters Union.

robert.zitter@hbo.com

Annex 3: Advisory Committees Subject to the Federal Advisory Committee
Act (FACA) as

###  Amended (5 U.S.C., App. 2)

A committee is an \"advisory committee\" subject to FACA if it is a
committee, board, commission, council, conference, panel, task force, or
other similar group, or any subcommittee or other subgroup thereof,
which is established and utilized by any agency official for the purpose
of obtaining advice or recommendations on issues or policies which are
within the scope of the agency\'s responsibilities. An advisory
committee is composed in whole or in part of individuals other than
full-time officers or employees of the Federal Government.

The agency establishing an advisory committee must provide for balanced
membership. For purposes of attaining balance, agencies shall consider
for membership interested persons and groups with professional or
personal qualifications or experience to contribute to the functions and
tasks to be performed.

Advisory committees are to be established only when they are essential
to the conduct of agency business. This depends on whether committee
deliberations are expected to result in the creation or elimination of,
or change in regulations, guidelines, or rules affecting agency
business, whether the committee is likely to make recommendations
resulting in significant improvements in service or reductions in cost,
and whether the committee\'s recommendations will provide an important
additional perspective or viewpoint impacting agency operations.
Advisory committees are advisory only. They are not empowered to
establish regulations.

An advisory committee shall be terminated whenever the stated objectives
of the committee have been accomplished, the subject matter or work of
the committee has become obsolete or excessively costly, or the
committee\'s main functions have been assumed by another entity within
the Federal Government. The committee may be terminated by agency
decision, but even without such a decision the committee will
automatically terminate within two years of its establishment, but can
be renewed prior to its charter expiration date.

An advisory committee\'s meetings shall be open to the public. Fifteen
day\'s advance public notice of meetings in the Federal Register is
required. Notices may be less than 15 days if a justification is stated
in the notice when it appears. However, in certain circumstances a
meeting may be closed if it is determined proper and consistent with the
provisions in the Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552(b). To
close all or part of a meeting, an advisory committee shall submit a
request to the agency head citing the specific provisions of the
Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552(b)) which justify the
closure. The request shall provide the agency head sufficient time to
review the matter in order to make a determination prior to publication
of the meeting notice. If it is decided to close any part of the
meeting, a statement to that effect must appear in the Federal Register
within the 15 day notice period.

The agency head or the advisory committee chairperson shall ensure that
detailed minutes of each advisory committee meeting are kept. The
minutes must include:

\(1\) Time, date, and place;

\(2\) A list of the following persons who were present:

\(i\) Advisory committee members and staff;

\(ii\) Agency employees; and

\(iii\) Members of the public who presented oral or written statements;

\(3\) An estimated number of other members of the public present;

\(4\) An accurate description of each matter discussed and the
resolution, if any, made by the committee of such matter; and

\(5\) Copies of each report or other document received, issued, or
approved by the committee.

The chairperson of each advisory committee shall certify to the accuracy
of all minutes of advisory committee meetings.

Under section 10(b) of FACA, records and other documents of an advisory
committee shall be made available for public inspection and copying.
Advisory committees are considered subject to the Freedom of Information
Act (FOIA), which sets forth procedures for public access to documents
and enumerates those circumstances in which documents may be withheld
from disclosure.

Under applicable rules governing advisory committees, 47 CFR
101-6.1004(k), meetings of task forces or working groups convened solely
to perform functions for an advisory committee or a subcommittee such as
gathering information, developing work plans, performing studies,
drafting reports and discussing preliminary findings are not considered
advisory committee meetings and thus are not subject to the public
notice and open meeting requirements of FACA.

In contrast, any subcommittee or other working group of an advisory
committee which functions as though it were the parent advisory
committee such as, for example, by (i) making decisions or consensual
proposals that would be binding on the parent committee or function as
the parent committee\'s own recommendations or (ii) providing
recommendations directly to the agency, would itself be considered an
advisory committee that needed to be chartered under FACA and would be
fully subject to all the requirements of FACA.

*The FCC staff is available to address questions from the TAC:*

Contact Stagg Newman as the DFO. With respect to specific FACA
questions, a resident expert is FCC attorney:

Paula Silberthau, at: PSILBERT@fcc.gov

Phone 202-418-1874

Additional FACA information is at the Office of Government Policy web
page at:

[http://www.policyworks.gov](http://www.policyworks.gov/)

**Annex 4: Focus groups , moderator, and group web addresses for
interaction.**

Spectrum Management (Charles L. Jackson, moderator)

<http://www.jacksons.net/tac>

Jules Bellisio jules@research.telcordia.com

Bran Ferren bran@disney.com

Christine Hemrick hemrick@cisco.com

Dewayne L. Hendricks dewayne@com21.com

Charles L. Jackson chuck@jacksons.net

Kalle Kontson kkontson@iitri.org

William C. Y. Lee william.lee@airtouch.com

Wah L. Lim wllim@mail.hac.com

Robert L. Martin bobmartin@lucent.com

Glenn Reitmeier greitmeier@sarnoff.com

Dennis Roberson Dennis.Roberson@motorola.com

Patrick White white.patrick@adlittle.com

Accessibility for Disabled Persons (Gregg Vanderheiden, moderator)

<http://trace.wisc.edu/docs/fccadv/disability.htm>

Jose M. Alvarez Caban jalvarez@coqui.net

Jules Bellisio jules@research.telcordia.com

Vinton G. Cerf vcerf@mci.net

Susan Estrada sestrada@aldea.com

Bran Ferren bran@disney.com

Dewayne L. Hendricks dewayne@com21.com

Charles L. Jackson chuck@jacksons.net

Paul F. Liao pliao@research.panasonic.com

David C. Nagel nagel@ipo.att.com

Gregg C. Vanderheiden gv@trace.wisc.edu

John F. Waters jack.waters@level3.com

Robert M. Zitter robert.zitter@hbo.com

Network Interconnection and Access (Marvin Sirbu, moderator)

[http://www-fcc.ini.cmu.edu/FCC/index.html](http://www.ini.cmu.edu/FCC/index.html)

Jules Bellisio jules@research.telcordia.com

Vinton G. Cerf vcerf@mci.net

Susan Estrada sestrada@aldea.com

Bran Ferren bran@disney.com

Christine Hemrick hemrick@cisco.com

Dewayne L. Hendricks dewayne@com21.com

Ross Ireland ross@pacbell.com

Paul F. Liao pliao@research.panasonic.com

Wah L. Lim wllim@mail.hac.com

Robert L. Martin bobmartin@lucent.com

David C. Nagel nagel@ipo.att.com

Glenn Reitmeier greitmeier@sarnoff.com

Dennis Roberson Dennis.Roberson@motorola.com

Marvin Sirbu sirbu@cmu.edu

Gregg C. Vanderheiden gv@trace.wisc.edu

John F. Waters jack.waters@level3.com

Patrick White white.patrick@adlittle.com

Robert M. Zitter robert.zitter@hbo.com

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

[^1]: **^    ?^** Smith, Albert A., Radio Frequency Principles and
    Applications: The Generation, Propagation, and Reception of Signals
    and Noise (IEEE 1998) Chapter 5 at 111, 125, 127.

[^2]: **^    ?^** *Id at* 130.

[^3]: **^    ?^** A.D. Spaulding and R.T. Disney, \"Man-Made Radio
    Noise, Part 1, Estimates for Business, Residential and Rural
    Areas,\" U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Office of Telecommunications,
    Institute for Telecommunications Sciences, OT Report 74-38, June
    1974. *See also* E.N. Skomal, *Man-Made Radio Noise*, Van Nostrand
    Reinhold Co., New York, 1978.

[^4]: **^    ?^** Rather than using primarily the 30 MHz to 3 GHz bands,
    communications devices now utilize spectrum up to and including the
    oxygen absorption bands at 70 GHz.

[^5]: **^    ?^** *See* Smith, *op.cite.* note 2; \"Long-term survey of
    the background electromagnetic environment in Switzerland\" by
    Bauman, J., Behrman, and Garbe.H. (Bern, Federal Office of the
    Environment:1991); and \"GPS Risk Assessment Study; Final Report\"

    Applied Physics Laboratory, The Johns Hopkins University: January
    1999 (Report VS-99-007).

[^6]: **^    ?^** W.R. Lauder, J.M. Bertrand, and P.R. Bouliane, \"An
    Update of CCIR Business and Residential Noise Levels,\" *1994 IEEE
    International Symposium on Electromagnetic Compatibility Record*,
    Chicago, Aug. 22-26, 1994.