Enterprise Wireless Insider® Volume 4 Issue 3

“Incorrectly Programmed”

Cerritos Ford of Cerritos, California was found to be operating on 467.675 MHz, a General Mobile Radio Service (GMRS) frequency, without a license and was issued a Notice of Apparent Liability (NAL) forfeiture for $4,000.  The FCC Enforcement Bureau’s Los Angeles office received a complaint of Cerritos Ford operating on the frequency.  Further investigation revealed that Cerritos Ford had just been issued a new license and believed they were operating on the correct license, 467.7625 MHz. It was discovered that 467.675 MHz was incorrectly programmed in their radios.  Regardless, the NAL was issued for continuing operation of an unlicensed frequency.  MORE

“No duty to do so …”

The FCC issued a $7,200 fine to Truman State University (TSU) for failure to properly maintain the public inspection file of their FM Station KKTR (FM), in Kirksville, Missouri. TSU claimed they were unaware that the issues/programs lists for their station had to be placed in the public inspection file because KKTR (FM) rebroadcasts programming for their main station KBIA (FM) which houses the public files. TSU did not deny that a mistake was made in not maintaining the files, but they stated they felt that they had “no duty to do so”. The Commission stated that ignorance of such violations are “not a mitigating factor and does not warrant a downward adjustment of an assessed forfeiture”.  However, based on the licensees “history of compliance with the Rules”, the Commission reduced the fine from $9,000 to $7,200.  MORE

800 MHz Public Safety Licensees and Consultant Question TA’s Cost Metrics

A Petition for Declaratory Ruling from several Public Safety 800 MHz incumbents and RCC Consultants, Inc., an engineering consulting firm heavily engaged in 800 MHz rebanding projects, have jointly requested that the FCC declare that the Transition Administrator’s (TA’s) cost metrics are not to be used in any material or determinative way during a negotiation, mediation or FCC review process.  The Petition requests that the Commission should return the Frequency Reconfiguration Agreement (FRA) cost metrics to their original informational purpose. The FCC is not under any obligation to act on the Petition within a defined time period or at all.  MORE

February 16 Application Start Date for $4.8 Billion

Applications will be accepted from February 16 to March 15, 2010, by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) and Rural Utilities Service (RUS) for the $4.8 billion in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) grants and loans in the second round for broadband funding. NTIA, which has allocated $2.6 Billion to this funding round indicated that the application process will be more user friendly and that the review process will be streamlined.  The RUS is adding support for satellite service for rural residents left unserved and will target areas of the greatest need as they provide $2.2 billion.  Awards will be announced by September 30, 2010.  MORE

Tower Siting Shot Clock

The FCC has denied an Emergency Motion for Stay of its decision to adopt a “shot clock” that requires State and Local Governmental entities to process applications for collocated and non-collocated wireless facilities within 90 and 150 days respectively.  The Stay Request was filed by several organizations representing governmental entities and argued that enforcement of the FCC’s requirement would impose irreparable hardship on those entities.  The FCC disagreed that the Petitioners had met the standard for stay relief and denied the Request.

FCC Defines Procedures for Auction 87

The FCC has defined the filings requirements and other procedures for Auction 87, which will “re-auction” Part 22 lower and upper paging bands licenses that were not acquired in Auctions 40 or 48 or that have been returned to the FCC.  The auction will begin on May 25, 2010.  The short-form application filing window will be open at the Commission from March 4 – 16, and with upfront payments are due on April 23.  MORE

CPNI Certification Due by March 1, 2010

All EWA private and commercial carrier members are reminded that their annual CPNI Certifications are due at the FCC on or before March 1, 2010. The FCC requires that all telecommunication carriers, whether their systems are interconnected with the PSTN or not, who provide telecommunications services must file a CPNI certification. Please contact EWA’s Membership Department if further information or assistance is needed.  MORE

An opportunity to promote effective FAC competition...

At this late date, I’m not sure why the American Automobile Association (AAA) suddenly is so interested in becoming certified by the FCC to coordinate 800/900 MHz Business/Industrial/Land Transportation frequencies.  I mean the band has been around for close to 40 years and is sufficiently encumbered that licensing activity has slowed considerably.   AAA’s request stated that adding it to the list of available coordinators would further competition – always a laudable public interest goal.  Of course, this new found interest may have something to do with the fact that as a “critical infrastructure” designated industry, automobile emergency applicants will have access to vacated Sprint Nextel spectrum in these bands, at least whatever is left over after the public safety community has claimed whatever it thinks it should keep.

 This AAA filing, however, does create an opportunity for the FCC to take care of some business associated with its frequency coordinators.  First, as not all coordinators are created equal, or at least don’t necessarily perform equally, wouldn’t it be a good idea to make available for consumers performance data that would enable an applicant to judge the qualifications of a particular coordinator in comparison with its peers? Wouldn’t it be a good idea if all frequency advisory committees had the obligation to resolve post-licensing interference conflicts in which their customers are involved pursuant to an MOU with the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau?  EWA and APCO have such agreements and I believe they are the only FACs that have formally agreed to assume these additional responsibilities. Wouldn’t it be a good idea when the FCC discovers that an erroneous certification was made, that they resolve the issue as soon as possible so that good applications don’t get fouled up by first-in-line bad applications?

As many readers are well aware, price is not the only reason why some frequency advisory committees are selected over others.    If the FCC truly wants to promote effective competition among FACs, as I believe they do, they should take this opportunity to consider some of these issues and create a competitive environment that works for PLMR applicants.