FCC Web Documents citing 24.239

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

• http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-218A1.doc http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-218A1.pdf http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-218A1.txt
  • another party is responsible. Should we take a similar approach to cost sharing among multiple licensees in the same band? If so, we seek comment on how beneficiaries should be determined. Given that few microwave links remain to be relocated, we suggest that a simple approach is preferable over the complex precision reflected in the cost sharing rules at sections 24.239-24.253. For example, in the event we license the 1915-1920 MHz band on a smaller than national basis, we might assign to each AWS licensee all of the costs of relocating facilities that are within its service area. We seek comment on this proposal and on any alternative means of allocating costs among multiple AWS licensees. We also seek comment on
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3610A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3610A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3610A1.txt
  • by Erratum, 18 FCC Rcd 24817 (2003) (``Secondary Markets Report and Order''), Second Report and Order, Order on Reconsideration, and Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 19 FCC Rcd 17503 (2004) (``Secondary Markets Second Report and Order''); see 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.913, 1.948, 1.2002, 1.2003, 1.8002, 1.9001, 1.9003, 1.9005, 1.9010, 1.9020, 1.9030, 1.9035, 1.9040, 1.9045, 1.9048, 1.9050, 1.9055, 1.9060, 1.9080, 24.239, 27.4, 27.10, 27.12, 90.20 (2004). 47 U.S.C. § 310(b)(4). Id. Rules and Policies on Foreign Participation in the U.S. Telecommunications Market; Market Entry and Regulation of Foreign-Affiliated Entities, Report and Order and Order on Reconsideration, 12 FCC Rcd 23891, 23896, ¶ 9, 23913, ¶ 50, and 23940, ¶¶ 111-12 (1997) (``Foreign Participation Order''), modified by Order on Reconsideration, 15 FCC
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3610A1_Erratum.doc
  • by Erratum, 18 FCC Rcd 24817 (2003) (``Secondary Markets Report and Order''), Second Report and Order, Order on Reconsideration, and Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 19 FCC Rcd 17503 (2004) (``Secondary Markets Second Report and Order''); see 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.913, 1.948, 1.2002, 1.2003, 1.8002, 1.9001, 1.9003, 1.9005, 1.9010, 1.9020, 1.9030, 1.9035, 1.9040, 1.9045, 1.9048, 1.9050, 1.9055, 1.9060, 1.9080, 24.239, 27.4, 27.10, 27.12, 90.20 (2004). 47 U.S.C. § 310(b)(4). Id. Rules and Policies on Foreign Participation in the U.S. Telecommunications Market; Market Entry and Regulation of Foreign-Affiliated Entities, Report and Order and Order on Reconsideration, 12 FCC Rcd 23891, 23896, ¶ 9, 23913, ¶ 50, and 23940, ¶¶ 111-12 (1997) (``Foreign Participation Order''), modified by Order on Reconsideration, 15 FCC
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3610A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3610A2.txt
  • by Erratum, 18 FCC Rcd 24817 (2003) ("Secondary Markets Report and Order"), Second Report and Order, Order on Reconsideration, and Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 19 FCC Rcd 17503 (2004) ("Secondary Markets Second Report and Order"); see 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.913, 1.948, 1.2002, 1.2003, 1.8002, 1.9001, 1.9003, 1.9005, 1.9010, 1.9020, 1.9030, 1.9035, 1.9040, 1.9045, 1.9048, 1.9050, 1.9055, 1.9060, 1.9080, 24.239, 27.4, 27.10, 27.12, 90.20 (2004). 9 C. Section 310 Decision Flowchart The following chart provides a general outline of how the Commission analyzes foreign ownership under Section 310 of the Act. 10 SECTION III - FOREIGN OWNERSHIP ANALYSIS UNDER SECTION 310(B)(4) A. Analytical Framework Section 310(b)(4) of the Act establishes a 25 percent benchmark for investment by foreign individuals, corporations,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3610A2_Erratum.pdf
  • by Erratum, 18 FCC Rcd 24817 (2003) ("Secondary Markets Report and Order"), Second Report and Order, Order on Reconsideration, and Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 19 FCC Rcd 17503 (2004) ("Secondary Markets Second Report and Order"); see 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.913, 1.948, 1.2002, 1.2003, 1.8002, 1.9001, 1.9003, 1.9005, 1.9010, 1.9020, 1.9030, 1.9035, 1.9040, 1.9045, 1.9048, 1.9050, 1.9055, 1.9060, 1.9080, 24.239, 27.4, 27.10, 27.12, 90.20 (2004). 9 C. Section 310 Decision Flowchart The following chart provides a general outline of how the Commission analyzes foreign ownership under Section 310 of the Act. 10 SECTION III - FOREIGN OWNERSHIP ANALYSIS UNDER SECTION 310(B)(4) A. Analytical Framework Section 310(b)(4) of the Act establishes a 25 percent benchmark for investment by foreign individuals, corporations,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-612A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-612A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-612A1.txt
  • of the relocation compensation and microwave cost-sharing rules. Pursuant to Section 101.69 et seq. of the Commission's rules, FMS licensees in the 1850-1990 MHz band are protected from interference caused by broadband PCS entities and broadband PCS entities are required to pay certain compensable relocation costs if FMS licensees are relocated to other bands or alternative facilities. Pursuant to Section 24.239 et seq. of the Commission's rules, broadband PCS entities are also required, in certain circumstances, to share the costs of relocating FMS licensees. Section 101.79 and Section 24.253 provide for a sunset date for all PCS entities of April 4, 2005, which is 10 years after the date that voluntary negotiations commenced for A and B Block broadband PCS entities.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-669A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-669A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-669A1.txt
  • service providers, certain of the Commission's rules in their current form may no longer be in the public interest and recommends that the Commission initiate proceedings to consider whether to modify or repeal Commission rules, rule parts, or portions thereof, which are codified in 47 C.F.R., including: Sections 1.5000-1.5007; Section 2.1204; Section 15.19(b)(3); Part 17; Section 20.12; Section 20.20; Sections 24.239-24.253; Part 25; Part 64, subpart A; Sections 101.69-101.81. The staff reports satisfy the requirements of Section 11(a) to identify current rules that should be modified or repealed. Under Section 11(b), the Commission is directed to "repeal or modify any regulation it determines to be no longer necessary in the public interest." 47 U.S.C. § 161(b). The Commission will take further
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-674A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-674A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-674A1.txt
  • Section 20.12(b)(3) provides that the rule has already sunset as of November 24, 2002. Section 20.20. Staff recommends that section 20.20 be removed from the Code of Federal Regulations. Section 20.20(f) provides that the rule has already sunset as of January 1, 2002. The staff also recommends removing the fixed microwave relocation rules for Personal Communications Services (PCS) in sections 24.239-24.253 and to amend sections 101.69-101.81 to remove the 1850-1990 MHz band because these rules have reached their sunset. appendix I: rule part analysis Part 1 - Practice and Procedure part 1, Subpart F - Wireless Telecommunications Services Applications and Procedures Description Part 1, subpart F sets forth procedural rules governing the filing of applications and the issuance of wireless licenses.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1090A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1090A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1090A1.txt
  • and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making, FCC 96-196, 11 FCC Rcd 8825 (1996). Broadband PCS entities were previously required to pay costs of relocating FMS licensees to other bands or alternative facilities, or in certain circumstances, to share the costs of relocating FMS licensees. The relocation reimbursement requirement sunset on April 4, 2005. See 47 C.F.R. §§ 24.239-24.253, 101.69-101.81; ``Broadband PCS Entities and Fixed Microwave Services Licensees Reminded of April 4, 2005 Sunset of Relocation Cost Compensation and Microwave Cost Sharing Rules,'' Public Notice, DA 05-612, 20 FCC Rcd 5141 (2005). . . Boundary limits using a predicted or measured 47 dBmV/m field strength limit for all 2110-2155 MHz transmissions address co-channel interference. Adjacent channel interference is addressed
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-767A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-767A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-767A1.txt
  • and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making, FCC 96-196, 11 FCC Rcd 8825 (1996). Broadband PCS entities were previously required to pay costs of relocating FMS licensees to other bands or alternative facilities, or in certain circumstances, to share the costs of relocating FMS licensees. The relocation reimbursement requirement sunset on April 4, 2005. See 47 C.F.R. §§ 24.239-24.253, 101.69-101.81; ``Broadband PCS Entities and Fixed Microwave Services Licensees Reminded of April 4, 2005 Sunset of Relocation Cost Compensation and Microwave Cost Sharing Rules,'' Public Notice, DA 05-612, 20 FCC Rcd 5141 (2005). 47 U.S.C. § 309(j)(3)(E)(i). See Amendment of Part 1 of the Commission's Rules - Competitive Bidding Procedures, Allocation of Spectrum Below 5 GHz Transferred from Federal Government
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-123A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-123A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-123A1.txt
  • § 604(b). See Amendment to the Commission's Rules Regarding a Plan for Sharing the Costs of Microwave Relocation, WT Docket No. 95-157, RM-8643, First Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 11 FCC Rcd 8825 (1996) (First Report and Order), Second Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 2705 (1997) (Second Report and Order). See also 47 C.F.R. §§ 24.239 - 24.253; 47 C.F.R. §§ 101.69 - 101.81. See Redevelopment of Spectrum to Encourage Innovation in the Use of New Telecommunications Technologies, ET Docket No. 92-9, RM-7981and RM-8004, First Report and Order and Third Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 7 FCC Rcd 6886 (1992) (Emerging Technologies First Report and Order). See id. See also Redevelopment of Spectrum to Encourage Innovation in
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-167A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-167A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-167A1.txt
  • the licensee against the spectrum lessee's failure to meet such obligations. Responsibility for Compliance With Cost-Sharing Obligations for Relocation of Microwave Licensees in Broadband PCS Background. The Report and Order did not directly address which entity, licensee or spectrum lessee, would be deemed the ``PCS entity'' for purposes of certain relocation responsibilities applicable in the broadband PCS services. Under sections 24.239 through 24.253 of the Commission's rules, which govern the relocation of microwave incumbents from certain frequencies in the 1850-1990 MHz Broadband PCS band, any ``PCS entity'' that benefits from spectrum clearance performed either by other PCS entities or by microwave incumbents that voluntarily relocate must contribute to such relocation costs. In its petition, Cingular Wireless requested that we clarify whether,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-168A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-168A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-168A1.txt
  • not already completed such work). For these reasons, we believe that service providers can roll out service in this band quickly. As discussed supra, we further conclude that it serves the public interest to assign this paired spectrum block to Nextel in conjunction with our efforts to resolve public safety interference issues in the 800 MHz band. 47 C.F.R. § 24.239. See Nextel Comments to the Third NPRM at 16. This obligation ends on the sunset date, at which time individual operations in the band will become secondary. See 47 C.F.R. § 101.79. AWS Third NPRM, 18 FCC Rcd 2223 ¶¶ 29-30. UTAM Comments to AWS Third NPRM at 6-7; Nextel Comments to AWS Third NPRM at 15-16; PCIA Comments to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-168A1_Erratum.doc
  • not already completed such work). For these reasons, we believe that service providers can roll out service in this band quickly. As discussed supra, we further conclude that it serves the public interest to assign this paired spectrum block to Nextel in conjunction with our efforts to resolve public safety interference issues in the 800 MHz band. 47 C.F.R. § 24.239. See Nextel Comments to the Third NPRM at 16. This obligation ends on the sunset date, at which time individual operations in the band will become secondary. See 47 C.F.R. § 101.79. AWS Third NPRM, 18 FCC Rcd 2223 ¶¶ 29-30. UTAM Comments to AWS Third NPRM at 6-7; Nextel Comments to AWS Third NPRM at 15-16; PCIA Comments to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-218A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-218A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-218A1.txt
  • another party is responsible. Should we take a similar approach to cost sharing among multiple licensees in the same band? If so, we seek comment on how beneficiaries should be determined. Given that few microwave links remain to be relocated, we suggest that a simple approach is preferable over the complex precision reflected in the cost sharing rules at sections 24.239-24.253. For example, in the event we license the 1915-1920 MHz band on a smaller than national basis, we might assign to each AWS licensee all of the costs of relocating facilities that are within its service area. We seek comment on this proposal and on any alternative means of allocating costs among multiple AWS licensees. We also seek comment on
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-219A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-219A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-219A1.txt
  • F.3d 395 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (collectively, ``Emerging Technologies proceeding''). See Amendment of the Commission's Rules to Establish New Personal Communications Services, GEN Docket No. 90-314, Fourth Memorandum Opinion and Order, 10 FCC Rcd 7955 (1995). UTAM is the Commission's frequency coordinator for UPCS devices in the 1910-1930 MHz band. The UPCS band relocation policies are codified at 47 C.F.R. §§ 24.239-24.53 and 101.69-101.81. AWS Third NPRM, 18 FCC Rcd at 2243-2244, ¶ 40. AWS Third NPRM, 18 FCC Rcd at 2247, ¶ 46. In 1994, the Commission anticipated that the 1910-1920 MHz band would be used for data applications such as high-speed, high-capacity LANs. See Amendment of the Commission's Rules to Establish New Personal Communications Services, GEN Docket No. 90-314, Second
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-172A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-172A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-172A1.txt
  • to reimbursement of ``actual'' costs, as opposed to so-called ``premium'' costs, defined as costs above those required to obtain comparable facilities. These premium costs may be incurred to induce an incumbent to agree voluntarily to relocation. See Microwave Cost Sharing First R&O and Second NPRM, 11 FCC Rcd at 8884-54, Appendix A, ¶¶ 18, 20. See, e.g., 47 C.F.R. §§ 24.239-24.253 (cost sharing procedures for PCS licensees responsible for the relocation of FS incumbents from the 1850-1990 MHz band). Filing dates will correspond to information collection requirements for the Commission's Universal Licensing System (ULS). See 47 U.S.C. § 154(i) (the Commission may make regulations, not inconsistent with the Act, as necessary in the execution of its functions). The information submitted need
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-45A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-45A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-45A1.txt
  • 2.1 GHz Bands, WT Docket No. 04-356, WT Docket No. 02-353, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 19 FCC Rcd 19263, 19282-84, ¶¶ 46-49 (2004) (``AWS-2 Service Rules NPRM''). See AWS Fifth Notice, 20 FCC Rcd at 15886, ¶ 45. See id. See AWS Fifth Notice, 20 FCC Rcd at 15886-87, ¶ 46. The pertinent rule provisions are set forth at Sections 24.239-24.253 of the Commission's Rules. The Part 24 cost sharing rules that applied to PCS entrants relocating FS incumbents from the 1850-1990 MHz band terminated on April 4, 2005. See 47 C.F.R. § 24.253; ``Broadband PCS Entities and Fixed Microwave Services Licensees Reminded Of April 4, 2005 Sunset of Relocation Cost Compensation and Microwave Cost Sharing Rules,'' Public Notice, 20 FCC
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-09-49A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-09-49A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-09-49A1.txt
  • 58-62 (2004). In the relocation of fixed microwave licensees by Personal Communications Service (PCS) licensees, whether relocation of an incumbent licensee was required was determined by an engineering analysis while cost sharing for later entrants was triggered using a proximity test (i.e. was the later entrant's base station close enough to the incumbent's fixed microwave path). 47 C.F.R. §§ 24.237, 24.239, 24. 247. See also Amendment of the Commission's Rules to Establish New Personal Communications Services, GEN. Docket No. 90-314, Second Report and Order, 8 FCC Rcd 7700 ¶¶ 141-174 (1993); Memorandum Opinion and Order, 9 FCC Rcd 4957 ¶ 186 (1994); Amendment to the Commission's Rules Regarding a Plan for Sharing the Costs of Microwave Relocation, WT Docket No. 95-157,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-09-58A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-09-58A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-09-58A1.txt
  • maximum beamwidth for FS stations in 6 GHz band is 2.2 degrees). FWCC Reply Comments at 5, citing 47 C.F.R. §§ 101.63(a) (requiring stations to be constructed within 18 months of license grant), 101.63(c) (license automatically terminates for failure to timely begin operation), 101.141(a)(3) (establishing minimum payload capacities for various bandwidths). AT&T Reply Comments at 4-5, citing 47 C.F.R. §§ 24.239, 101.75(a). As mentioned earlier, the Commission has granted 880 waivers to allow FS frequency paths greater than 10 megahertz in the Upper 6 GHz Band, 548 of them have been for 30 megahertz channels. 47 C.F.R. § 101.141(a)(3). 47 C.F.R. § 101.143(a). See FWCC Six-MHz Petition at 5; Comsearch Comments at 2 n.2. See AT&T Reply Comments at 4-5, citing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-09-58A1_Rcd.pdf
  • 101.115 (default maximum beamwidth for FS stations in 6 GHz band is 2.2 degrees). 54FWCC Reply Comments at 5, citing47 C.F.R. §§ 101.63(a) (requiring stations to be constructed within 18 months of license grant), 101.63(c) (license automatically terminates for failure to timely begin operation), 101.141(a)(3) (establishing minimum payload capacities for various bandwidths). 55AT&T Reply Comments at 4-5, citing47 C.F.R. §§ 24.239, 101.75(a). 56As mentioned earlier, the Commission has granted 880 waivers to allowFS frequency paths greater than 10 megahertz in the Upper 6 GHz Band, 548 of them have been for 30 megahertz channels. 9627 Federal Communications Commission FCC 09-58 within 30 months after they are licensed.57In addition, our rules require FS links in the 6 GHz band to have a
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-109A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-109A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-109A1.txt
  • FWCC Petition). API Opposition to FWCC Petition at 3. API notes that the final deadline for incumbent licensees to relocate from the 2.1 GHz band is 2016. Id. at 3 n.10. API Opposition to FWCC Petition at 4. Id. at 3-4. Id. at 4. Id. Reply Comments of AT&T, Inc. (filed Apr. 30, 2008) at 4-5, citing 47 C.F.R. §§ 24.239, 101.75(a). Amendment of Part 101 of the Commission's Rules to Accommodate 30 Megahertz Channels in the 6525-6875 MHz Band, et al., WT Docket No. 09-114, RM-11417, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Order, 24 FCC Rcd 9620 (2009) (NPRM). NPRM, 24 FCC Rcd at 9627 ¶ 15. Id. Id. at 9627-9628 ¶ 16. Id. at 9628 ¶ 17, citing Comsearch Comments
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Orders/2000/fcc00123.doc
  • § 604(b). See Amendment to the Commission's Rules Regarding a Plan for Sharing the Costs of Microwave Relocation, WT Docket No. 95-157, RM-8643, First Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 11 FCC Rcd 8825 (1996) (First Report and Order), Second Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 2705 (1997) (Second Report and Order). See also 47 C.F.R. §§ 24.239 - 24.253; 47 C.F.R. §§ 101.69 - 101.81. See Redevelopment of Spectrum to Encourage Innovation in the Use of New Telecommunications Technologies, ET Docket No. 92-9, RM-7981and RM-8004, First Report and Order and Third Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 7 FCC Rcd 6886 (1992) (Emerging Technologies First Report and Order). See id. See also Redevelopment of Spectrum to Encourage Innovation in