Exhibit 1

0688-EX-ST-2005 Text Documents

Nokia Inc.

2005-11-18ELS_73546

                                    Nokia, Inc.
             Application for Experimental Special Temporary Authority
                                   New York City

                                         Exhibit 1

Nature of the Operation. This application seeks special temporary authority to operate
a transmitter for the purpose of demonstrating the transmission of digital video signals to
handheld receivers located in cell phones. The transmission will be conducted using the
digital video broadcast — handheld (DVB—H) modulation, which differs from the 8—VSB
modulation employed in over—the—air digital television broadcasting. The signals to be
transmitted are not intended for the public and are not displayable on conventional digital
video receivers. As such, the demo will not involve "broadcasting" as defined in Section
3 of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. § 153(5). Instead, the signals are designed to
demonstrate a mobile service intended to complement digital cellular service. The
spectrum chosen for this demonstration was picked to accommodate prototype equipment
from overseas. Eventually, the service is expected to operate in spectrum above that
authorized for broadcast television.

Frequency Selection. Great care has been devoted to selecting spectrum for this
operation that is unlikely to cause harmful interference to either broadcasting stations or
to land mobile stations authorized in the 470 — 512 MHz portion of the UHF television
band. The attached Engineering Statement from the firm of Cavell, Mertz, and Davis,
Inc., has been prepared to address the selection of the proposed frequency.

Site and Antenna Considerations. The proposed operation will be conducted inside an
exhibit space on the third floor of the New York Hilton Hotel. The space consists of an
interior room without windows. For interference analysis purposes, the operations have
been assumed to be non—directional. However, a directional antenna will be used in the
room. The maximum effective radiated power is two watts as shown in the application.
The antenna characteristics are shown in Exhibit 2. Actual antenna orientation within the
room must be determined after the equipment is set up and tested in the room.


                           Engineering Statement
               REQUEST FOR EXPERIMENTAL AUTHORIZATION
                                 prepared for
                                         Nokia, Inc.
                          Experimental DT New York, New York
                                       Ch. 43 2 Watts

        Nokia, Inc. ("‘Nokia"), seeks Experimental Authorization to transmit a digital
low—power television signal on UHF Television Channel 43.              The facility requested
herein will be used to demonstrate the technical performance of Digital Video Broadcast
Handheld ("DVB—H"), a portable video technology intended to broadcast video, audio,
and data to handheld devices.


Facilities Requested

        The technical parameters for the proposed operation involve a directional
transmitting antenna temporarily placed within a meeting room at the Hilton, New York
hotel, 1335 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY at the coordinates shown below.

FAA notification is not required for this antenna which will strictly be used indoors.
                                     40° 45° 44" North Latitude
                                    73° 58‘ 45" West Longitude
                                              (NAD 27)



        A maximum effective radiated power ("ERP") of 2 Watts with an antenna
radiation center height above ground ("HAG") of 16 meters is proposed‘.              Six MHz
bandwidth, DVB—T COFDM modulation will be utilized‘. The proposed station will be
constructed to confine out—of—channel emissions within the "simple" mask specified in
§74.794 of the FCC‘s Rules.

NTSC, DTV, LPTV, and Class A Station Allocation Considerations

        In the endeavor to select a channel that is unlikely to cause interference, a study of
all nearby authorized stations in the FCC‘s CDBS database was performed.                   An


‘ The proposed antenna height is 33 meters above mean sea level.
* The DVB—T modulation will be utilized to carry a digital video broadcast handhelds ("DVB—H")
encapsulated payload. See Digital Video Broadcasting (DVB); Transmission System for Handheld
Terminals (DVB—H), European Telecommunications Standards Institute EN 302—304 V1.1.1; November,
2004.




                                  Cavell, Mertz & Davis, Inc.


                                Engineering Statement
                       REQUEST FOR EXPERIMENTAL LICENSE
                                      (page 2 of 5)


interference study per OET Bulletin 69° was performed to examine the change in
interference experienced by other stations that would result from the proposed
Channel 43 facility.


         For study purposes, a non—directional antenna, emitting 2 Watts ERP was
assumed, although the proposed directional antenna will only reach 2 Watts ERP in a few
directions.    Further, no consideration of building attenuation (either from the hotel
meeting room or from surrounding structures) was considered. As such, the results of the

study represent a "worst case" scenario.


         The results of the interference study, summarized in Table 1, indicate that the

instant proposal will cause no additional interference to any authorized facility, except to
the unbuilt Construction Permit facility of WXNY—LP (Ch. 43 New York, NY
BPTTL—20021204AAZ).             WXNY—LP is licensed on Channel 32.                   According to a
representative of the licensee of WXNY—LP, construction of the Channel 43 facility will
not be completed until long after Nokia‘s proposed operation in December 2005. The
applicant recognizes the secondary status provided under Experimental Authorization and
will cease operation as necessary in the event actual interference occurs.


Other Considerations

        The nearest FCC monitoring station is at Laurel, Maryland, at a distance of
301 km from the proposed site.            The proposed site exceeds by a great margin the
minimum distance specified in §73.1030(c)(3)(ii) that would suggest consideration of the
monitoring station.




> Although OET Bulletin 69 specifies procedures for quantifying interference caused by 8—VSB facilities,
laboratory tests have shown little difference between the desired—to—undesired ratios of DVB—T COFDM (to
both NTSC and 8—VSB) and 8—VSB. See the VSB/COFDM Project (NAB and MSTV) "Investigation of
VSB Improvements" December 2000. Adjustments in the OET Bulletin 69 computer program were made
to consider use of the "simple" emission mask.




                                     Cavell, Mertz & Davis, Inc.


                               Engineering Statement
                      REQUEST FOR EXPERIMENTAL LICENSE
                                     (page 3 of 5)


       The U.S. — Canadian agreement calls for notification of digital low—power stations
within 100 km of the border.         Similarly, the U.S. — Mexico agreement calls for
notification of 1 KW (or less) low—power TV stations within 60 km of the border. As the
proposed site is located at least 395 km from the nearest point on the U.S. — Canadian
border and 2,709 km from the nearest point on the U.S. — Mexico border, the proposed
facility does not require international coordination.

Conclusion

       It is thus believed, based on the foregoing, that the facility proposed herein will
satisfy all of the pertinent Commission Rules and Policies now in effect regarding
allocation matters.


Environmental Considerations

       The proposed transmitting antenna will be temporarily placed within a hotel
meeting room.     Because no change to the exterior of the building is involved, it is
believed that this application may be categorically excluded from environmental
processing pursuant to §1.1306 of the FCC Rules.


       The proposed experimental operation was evaluated for human exposure to
radiofrequency (RF) energy using the procedures outlined in the Commission‘s OET
Bulletin No. 65 ("OET 65").


       OET—65‘s formula for television transmitting antennas is based on the NTSC
transmission standards, where the average power is normally much less than the peak
power. For the DTV facility in the instant proposal, the peak—to—average ratio is different
than the NTSC ratio. The DTV ERP figure herein refers to the average power level. The
formula used for calculating DTV signal density in this analysis is essentially the same as
equation (10) in OET—65.




                                  Cavell, Mertz & Davis, Inc.


                              Engineering Statement
                     REQUEST FOR EXPERIMENTAL LICENSE
                                         (page 4 of 5)


        S = (33.4098) (F2) (ERP) / D

        Where:
        S        =     power density in microwatts/em"
        ERP      =     total (average) ERP in Watts
        F        =     relative field factor
        D        =     distance in meters

        Appropriate crowd control methods, such as posts, rope and stanchions, along
with an appropriate RF exposure sign, will be used to prevent the public from reaching a
point less than one—half meter from the proposed antenna. Using the above equation,
calculations were made to predict power density attributable to the proposed facility at
this distance.



        An ERP of 2 Watts, horizontally polarized, will be employed. A relative field of
100 percent is used for this calculation. The "uncontrolled / general population" limit
specified in §1.1310 for Channel 43 is 431 uW/em*. Using this formula, the proposed
facility will reach 267 uW/cm*, or 62 percent of the "uncontrolled / general public‘
Maximum Permissible Exposure ("MPE") limit at a distance of one—half meter from the
proposed antenna.

       As demonstrated herein, excessive levels of RF energy will not be caused at
publicly accessible areas near the antenna. Consequently, members of the general public
will not be exposed to RF levels in excess of the Commission‘s guidelines.

       Based on the preceding, it is believed that the instant proposal may be
categorically excluded from environmental processing under Section 1.1306 of the Rules,
hence preparation of an Environmental Assessment is not required.


Certification

       The undersigned hereby certifies that the foregoing statement was prepared by
him or under his direction, and that it is true and correct to the best of his knowledge and




                                 Cavell, Mertz & Davis, Inc.


                             Engineering Statement
                    REQUEST FOR EXPERIMENTAL LICENSE
                                        (page 5 of 5)



belief. Mr. Ryson is a senior engineer in the firm of Cavell, Mertz & Davis, Inc. and has
submitted numerous engineering exhibits to the Federal Communications Commission.
His qualifications are a matter of record with that agency.



                                       NYRc—
                                      Daniel G. Ryson
                                      November 18, 2005


Cavell, Mertz & Davis, Inc.
7839 Ashton Avenue
Manassas, VA 20109
(703) 392—9090

List of Attachments
Table 1 — Interference Analysis Results Summary




                                 Cavell, Mertz & Davis, Inc.


                                         Table 1
                  INTERFERENCE ANALYSIS RESULTS SUMMARY
                                       prepared for
                                       Nokia, Inc.
                             Experimental DT New York, NY
                                      Ch.43 2W

                                                                                 ——— Unique Interference ————
Stations     City, State                  Distance     Baseline       Service           from proposal
Considered   Channel                        (km)      Population    Population      Population Percentage
                                                          (1)           (2)            (3)          (4)

W28A]        ALLINGTOWN, CT                 103.4     —————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LIC          28

WFPA—CA      PHILADELPHIA, PA               133.6     —————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LIC          28

W29CF        HEMPSTEAD, NY                   36.3      «...——— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LIC          29

WTXF—TV      PHILADELPHIA, PA               133.6     —————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LC           29

WNYX—LP      NEW YORK, NY                     34      .._.—— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LIC          35

W36AZ        SUSSEX, NJ                      63.3     .. no new interference caused by proposal —————
CP           35

WYBE         PHILADELPHIA, PA               133.4     —————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LIC          35

W36AZ        SUSSEX, NJ                      63.3      —..———— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LIC          36

WNYN—LP      DEER PARK, NY                    3.4     —————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LC           39

WDVB—CA      EDISON, NJ                      43.5      .————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LIC          39

WLVT—TV      ALLENTOWN, PA                  125.0     —————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LIC          39




                                    Cavell, Mertz Davis, Inc.


                                           Table 1
                  INTERFERENCE ANALYSIS RESULTS SUMMARY
                                         prepared for
                                          Nokia, Inc.
                               Experimental DT New York, NY
                                         Ch.43 2 W
                                         (page 2 of 4)

                                                                                   ——— Unique Interference ————
Stations     City, State                   Distance       Baseline      Service          from proposal
Considered   Channel                         (km)        Population   Population     Population Percentage
                                                            (1)            (2)            (3)            (4)

WXTV         PATERSON, NJ                        L7      ———~— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LIC          41

WNALLP       SPRINGVILLE, NJ                   133.4     —————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LIC          41

WKOB—LP      NEW YORK, NY                        6.9     .. no new interference caused by proposal —————
CP           42

WA42CX       PORT JERVIS, NY                    92.7     ————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
CP           42

WSAH         BRIDGEPORT, CT                     98.7     —————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
CP           42

WA2AE        POUGHKEEPSIE, NY                 106.3      —————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LIC          42

WTXF—TV      PHILADELPHIA, PA                 1324       —————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LIC          42

WTXF—TV      PHILADELPHIA, PA                 133.6      —————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
CP           42

WSKG—TV      BINGHAMTON, NY                   218.8      ————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
CP MOD       42

WXNY—LP      NEW YORK, NY                        3.4         <————— no protection required; see text —————
CP           43

WNJT         TRENTON, NJ                       80.2      ————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LIC          43




                                      Cavell, Mertz Davis, Inc.


                                          Table 1
                  INTERFERENCE ANALYSIS RESULTS SUMMARY
                                        prepared for
                                        Nokia, Inc.
                              Experimental DT New York, NY
                                        Ch. 43 2W
                                        (page 3 of 4)

                                                                                   —~— Unique Interference ————
Stations     City, State                   Distance      Baseline       Service           from proposal
Considered   Channel                         (km)       Population    Population      Population Percentage
                                                            (1)           (2)            (3)          (4)

W55BS        BELVIDERE, NJ                     91.6     —————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
CP           43

WSAH         BRIDGEPORT, CT                    98.7     —————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LIC          43

WEWB—TV      SCHENECTADY, NY                 206.9      —————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LIC          43

WPMT         YORK, PA                        237.0      ————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LIC          43

WA43CJ       MANSFIELD, PA                   284.0      —————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
CP           43

wWGBxX—TV    BOSTON, MA                      286.2       —————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LIC          43

WNYS—TV      SYRACUSE, NY                    299.0      .—————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LIC          43

WPXW         MANASSAS, VA                    361.2       —————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LIC          43

WNYW         NEW YORK, NY                       1.7     _—————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LIC          44

WNYW         NEW YORK, NY                       L.]     —————— no new interference caused by proposal ————
CP MOD       44

WMCN—TV      ATLANTIC CITY, NJ               136.4      —————— no new interference caused by proposal ——~———
CP           44

WVIA—TV      SCRANTON, PA                    166.0      —————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LIC          44

WELL—CA      PHILADELPHIA, PA                133.7      —————— no new interference caused by proposal —~———
CP           45

WMBQ—CA      MANHATTAN, NY                      1.8     ———— no new interference caused by proposal —~———
CP           46



                                     Cavell, Mertz Davis, Inc.


                                    Table 1
                    INTERFERENCE ANALYSIS RESULTS SUMMARY
                                               prepared for
                                              Nokia, Inc.
                                 Experimental DT New York, NY
                                           Ch.43 2W
                                              (page 4 of 4)

                                                                                        ——— Unique Interference ————
Stations     City, State                         Distance      Baseline      Service           from proposal
Considered   Channel                               (km)       Population   Population      Population   Percentage
                                                                 (1)           (2)            (3)           (4)

WRNN—LP      NYACK, NY                               46.2     .————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
CP           46

Ww46DQ       PORT JERVIS, NY                         92.7     .—————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
CP           46

WA4GBL       ALLENTOWN—BETHLEHEM, PA                125.5      ————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LIC          46

WNJU         LINDEN, NJ                               6.3     .. no new interference caused by proposal —————
CP           47

WNJU         LINDEN, NJ                               6.3      —.—— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LIC          47

WNIJN        MONTCLAIR, NJ                           21.9     —————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LC           50

WNHX—LP      NEW HAVEN, CT                          109.9     .————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
CP           51

W51BN        WHITE LAKE, NY                         1254      .————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LIC          51

WNHX—LP      NEW HAVEN, CT                          129.1     —————— no new interference caused by proposal —————
LIC          51


             Notes:
             (1) For DTV Stations: Greater of NTSC or DTV Service Population, from FCC Table
                 For NTSC Stations: Population within noise—limited contour
                 For LPTV & Class A Stations: Population within the dipole—corrected 74 dBu contour
             (2) Interference—free service population per OET—69 before consideration of proposal
             (3) Net change in population receiving interference resulting from proposal
             (4) Proposal‘s impact in terms of percentage, equals (3)/(1) times 100 percent: not to
                  exceed zero when rounded to the nearest whole percent
             The determination of stations for consideration and the determination of baseline population and
             interference percentages were made as described in the Commission‘s August 10, 1998 Public Notice
             "Additional Application Processing Guidelines for Digital Television"




                                           Cavell, Mertz Davis, Inc.



Document Created: 2018-11-27 05:59:56
Document Modified: 2018-11-27 05:59:56

© 2026 FCC.report
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the FCC