FCC Web Documents citing 22.351

as compiled by hallikainen.com/FccRules on 2012 07 01

• http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-305A1.doc http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-305A1.pdf http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-305A1.txt
  • This change was made in Procedures for Reviewing Requests for Relief from State and Local Regulations Pursuant to Section 332(c)(7)(B)(v) of the Communications Act of 1934, WT Docket No. 97-192, Second Memorandum Opinion and Order and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 12 FCC Rcd 13494, 13541 ¶ 51 (1997). 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1307(b), 2.1091, 2.1093. . See, e.g., 47 C.F.R. §§ 22.351-22.383, 24.50-24.55, 27.50-27.66. See 47 C.F.R. § 2.301. . The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 identified the 1710-1755 MHz band for competitive bidding in section 3002(c) and the 2110-2150 MHz band in section 3002(b). Pub. L. No. 105-33, 111 Stat. 251 (1997). The timing requirements applicable to both these bands were recently rescinded. Auction Reform Act of 2002, Pub. L. No.
• http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-95A1.doc http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-95A1.pdf http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-95A1.txt
  • (ASSB). This rule section appears to be obsolete in light of section 22.357, which permits Part 22 licensees to use any emission type that complies with applicable emission limits. Under section 22.357, Part 22 licensees may change emission types without seeking prior approval. We tentatively conclude that section 22.161 should be eliminated. Operational and Technical Requirements Channel Assignment Policy. Section 22.351 sets forth the general policy for the assignment of PMS channels. The third sentence of this section uses the term ``common carrier.'' Consistent with the approach taken above, we propose to replace the term ``common carrier'' with the term ``licensee.'' Interference Protection. Section 22.352 provides, in pertinent part, that PMS licensees shall be considered non-interfering if they operate in accordance
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-462A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-462A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-462A1.txt
  • Division Wireless Telecommunications Bureau CIS's application was accepted for filing on May 24, 1996 and was assigned File No. 03281-CL-MP-96. See Public Notice, Report No. CL-96-49 (rel. May 24, 1996). See Portland Cellular Partnership, 8 FCC Rcd 4146, 4152 (1993) (holder of interim operating authority permitted to operate ``until the permanent licensee is ready to begin providing service''). Commission rule 22.351, 47 C.F.R. § 22.351, provides that each channel or channel block is assigned exclusively to one common carrier in each service area. See In re Applications of Western California Cellular Partners and Mtel Cellular, Inc., Order, 11 FCC Rcd 5705 (1996) (Commission granted authorization for operation in the Wisconsin 2-Bayfield RSA to Wisconsin II pursuant to an approved settlement agreement).
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2972A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2972A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2972A1.txt
  • September 13, 2004 Released: September 14, 2004 By the Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division, Enforcement Bureau: On August 13, 2003, Northwest Missouri Cellular Limited Partnership (``NWMC'') filed with this Commission a formal complaint against Cingular Wireless, LLC d/b/a Cingular Wireless (``Cingular'') pursuant to section 208 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''), and sections 22.907, 22.911, and 22.351 of the Commission's rules. The complaint alleges, among other things, that Cingular violated the Commission's rules by deploying Global Systems for Mobile Communications (``GSM'') without properly coordinating its channel assignments and by extending its coverage into NWMC's protected Cellular Geographic Service Area (``CGSA'') without NWMC's consent. By agreement of the parties, the complaint was held in abeyance pending mediation and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1364A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1364A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1364A1.txt
  • requirement that licensees in Part 22 services be common carriers. Revised Section 22.1(b) by deleting the reference to ``domestic common carrier.'' In Section 22.401, deleted the words ``Communications common carriers'' and replaced with the words ``Eligible entities.'' See 47 C.F.R. § 22.7. These revisions implement the decision to remove the common carrier restriction from the Part 22 eligibility rules. Section 22.351, regarding channel assignments, was similarly amended. Deleted the definitions for Radio Common Carrier and Wireline Common Carrier, as these terms are no longer used in Part 22, and corrected references to the term ``Air-ground Radiotelephone Service'' contained in several definitions in Section 22.99 to read ``Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service.'' The actions taken by the Commission here do not impact the ability
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-305A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-305A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-305A1.txt
  • This change was made in Procedures for Reviewing Requests for Relief from State and Local Regulations Pursuant to Section 332(c)(7)(B)(v) of the Communications Act of 1934, WT Docket No. 97-192, Second Memorandum Opinion and Order and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 12 FCC Rcd 13494, 13541 ¶ 51 (1997). 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1307(b), 2.1091, 2.1093. . See, e.g., 47 C.F.R. §§ 22.351-22.383, 24.50-24.55, 27.50-27.66. See 47 C.F.R. § 2.301. . The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 identified the 1710-1755 MHz band for competitive bidding in section 3002(c) and the 2110-2150 MHz band in section 3002(b). Pub. L. No. 105-33, 111 Stat. 251 (1997). The timing requirements applicable to both these bands were recently rescinded. Auction Reform Act of 2002, Pub. L. No.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-95A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-95A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-95A1.txt
  • (ASSB). This rule section appears to be obsolete in light of section 22.357, which permits Part 22 licensees to use any emission type that complies with applicable emission limits. Under section 22.357, Part 22 licensees may change emission types without seeking prior approval. We tentatively conclude that section 22.161 should be eliminated. Operational and Technical Requirements Channel Assignment Policy. Section 22.351 sets forth the general policy for the assignment of PMS channels. The third sentence of this section uses the term ``common carrier.'' Consistent with the approach taken above, we propose to replace the term ``common carrier'' with the term ``licensee.'' Interference Protection. Section 22.352 provides, in pertinent part, that PMS licensees shall be considered non-interfering if they operate in accordance
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-287A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-287A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-287A1.txt
  • We also revise Section 22.1(b) to delete the reference to ``domestic common carrier,'' and Section 22.401 to delete the words ``Communications common carriers'' and replace with the words ``Eligible entities (see § 22.7).'' These revisions help to implement the proposal we adopt to remove the common carrier restriction from the Part 22 eligibility rules. We agree with Blooston that Section 22.351, regarding channel assignments, should be similarly amended. Finally, we delete the definitions for Radio Common Carrier and Wireline Common Carrier, as these terms are no longer used in Part 22, and correct references to the term ``Air-ground Radiotelephone Service'' contained in several definitions in Section 22.99 to read ``Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service.'' While the commenters are overwhelmingly supportive of our proposal
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-287A1_Erratum.doc
  • We also revise Section 22.1(b) to delete the reference to ``domestic common carrier,'' and Section 22.401 to delete the words ``Communications common carriers'' and replace with the words ``Eligible entities (see § 22.7).'' These revisions help to implement the proposal we adopt to remove the common carrier restriction from the Part 22 eligibility rules. We agree with Blooston that Section 22.351, regarding channel assignments, should be similarly amended. Finally, we delete the definitions for Radio Common Carrier and Wireline Common Carrier, as these terms are no longer used in Part 22, and correct references to the term ``Air-ground Radiotelephone Service'' contained in several definitions in Section 22.99 to read ``Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service.'' While the commenters are overwhelmingly supportive of our proposal
• http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2004/DA-04-2972A1.html
  • September 13, 2004 Released: September 14, 2004 By the Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division, Enforcement Bureau: On August 13, 2003, Northwest Missouri Cellular Limited Partnership (``NWMC'') filed with this Commission a formal complaint against Cingular Wireless, LLC d/b/a Cingular Wireless (``Cingular'') pursuant to section 208 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''),1 and sections 22.907, 22.911, and 22.351 of the Commission's rules.2 The complaint alleges, among other things, that Cingular violated the Commission's rules by deploying Global Systems for Mobile Communications (``GSM'') without properly coordinating its channel assignments and by extending its coverage into NWMC's protected Cellular Geographic Service Area (``CGSA'') without NWMC's consent.3 By agreement of the parties, the complaint was held in abeyance pending mediation and
• http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/26/releases/fc970059.pdf http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/26/releases/fc970059.txt http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/26/releases/fc970059.wp
  • shared channels) and, other than for the shared channels, no additional site-by-site applications will be accepted (with the exception of applications filed pursuant to Sections 22.369 and 90.177, applications filed for coordination with Mexico and Canada, and applications required under Section 1.1301 et seq.) The Bureau will also release a Public Federal Communications Commission FCC 97-59 See 47 C.F.R. § 22.351. 20 See 47 C.F.R. §§ 22.3, 22.105, 22.123(e), and 22.567. 21 Part 22 defines applications as mutually exclusive if (1) more than one application is pending, and (2) the grant 22 of one application would preclude the grant of the other(s) under applicable Commission rules. 47 C.F.R. § 22.131. See Implementation of Section 309(j) of the Communications Act -- Competitive
• http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/26/releases/fc990098.pdf http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/26/releases/fc990098.txt http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/26/releases/fc990098.wp
  • paired channels originally allocated for mobile telephone service 192 once the "auction for the UHF and VHF common carrier channels" is completed. Blooston contends that 193 in reliance on the Commission's proceeding in CC Docket 87-120, which permitted paging carriers to use Federal Communications Commission FCC 99-98 Id. 194 Consolidated Petition at 10. 195 Id. 196 See 47 C.F.R. § 22.351(c)(4) (providing that "[e]xcept as provided elsewhere in this part, no protection from 197 interference is afforded in the following situations: . . . (4) Interference to fixed stations. Licensees should attempt to resolve such interference by technical means or operating arrangements"). See Second Report and Order and Further Notice, 12 FCC Rcd at 2769, ¶ 69. 198 Id. at 2753,
• http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/26/releases/pagebp_g.pdf
  • point and a person on duty who is responsible for station operation. This section does not require that the person on duty be at the control point or continuously monitor all transmissions of the station. However, the control point must have facilities that enable the person on duty to turn off the transmitters in the event of a malfunction. § 22.351 Channel assignment policy. The channels allocated for use in the Public Mobile Services are listed in the applicable subparts of this part. 29 Channels and channel blocks are assigned in such a manner as to facilitate the rendition of service on an interference-free basis in each service area. Except as otherwise provided in this part, each channel or channel block
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Orders/2000/da000462.doc
  • Division Wireless Telecommunications Bureau CIS's application was accepted for filing on May 24, 1996 and was assigned File No. 03281-CL-MP-96. See Public Notice, Report No. CL-96-49 (rel. May 24, 1996). See Portland Cellular Partnership, 8 FCC Rcd 4146, 4152 (1993) (holder of interim operating authority permitted to operate ``until the permanent licensee is ready to begin providing service''). Commission rule 22.351, 47 C.F.R. § 22.351, provides that each channel or channel block is assigned exclusively to one common carrier in each service area. See In re Applications of Western California Cellular Partners and Mtel Cellular, Inc., Order, 11 FCC Rcd 5705 (1996) (Commission granted authorization for operation in the Wisconsin 2-Bayfield RSA to Wisconsin II pursuant to an approved settlement agreement).
• http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2004/DA-04-2972A1.html
  • September 13, 2004 Released: September 14, 2004 By the Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division, Enforcement Bureau: On August 13, 2003, Northwest Missouri Cellular Limited Partnership (``NWMC'') filed with this Commission a formal complaint against Cingular Wireless, LLC d/b/a Cingular Wireless (``Cingular'') pursuant to section 208 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''),1 and sections 22.907, 22.911, and 22.351 of the Commission's rules.2 The complaint alleges, among other things, that Cingular violated the Commission's rules by deploying Global Systems for Mobile Communications (``GSM'') without properly coordinating its channel assignments and by extending its coverage into NWMC's protected Cellular Geographic Service Area (``CGSA'') without NWMC's consent.3 By agreement of the parties, the complaint was held in abeyance pending mediation and