FCC Record, Volume 27, No. 5, Pages 3728 to 4696, April 9 - April 27, 2012 Page: 3,989
ix, 3728-4696 p. ; 28 cm.View a full description of this book.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Division granted NTI's requests for waiver finding that the licensee demonstrated that it intended in good
faith to file the notifications along with renewal applications for all of the licenses in a timely manner.39
17. In the instant case, DeltaCom states in its waiver requests that "[t]he timely-filing of the
required buildout notifications ... clearly shows that [it] ... fully intended to and, in good faith, did
comply with the Commission's buildout requirements."" DeltaCom, however, has not provided any
information to support a finding that it attempted in good faith to comply with Commission rules with
respect to the renewal of the licenses for Stations WPOI503, WPOI504, and WPOI505. For example, it
has not described any steps that might have been taken during the 90-day renewal period to submit the
required applications in a timely manner or a declaration signed by the person responsible for making the
filings stating that, under the penalty of perjury, he or she unintentionally did not file renewal applications
along with the coverage notifications for the licenses.
18. DeltaCom further argues that granting its waiver requests would be in the public interest
because the stations "provide service to hundreds of users, including a number of public service entities,
such as, towing companies, taxi services, waste removal companies and armored vehicle companies."''
DeltaCom, however, makes no showing on how providing service to these customers in the instant case
constitutes unique or unusual factual circumstances. Nor do DeltaCom's waiver requests identify any
harm to public safety or consumer welfare that would result from license termination.42 While DeltaCom
argues that its customer base supports grant of its waiver requests, it does not show that termination of
service to its customers would leave them without reasonable service alternatives or result in loss of a
unique service.43 Furthermore, we have previously found that the nature of a licensee's operations, by
itself, does not justify a waiver."
39 See also Letter from Cyndi Thomas, Assistant Chief, Mobility Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau to
Cheng-Yi Liu, Esq., Counsel to Wave Runner, LLC (ULS File Nos. 0004868550 and 0004868551) (Dec. 14, 2011)
(granting requests for waiver of the deadline for filing renewal applications for two broadband PCS licenses where
the person responsible prepared and filed in a timely manner seven of nine renewal applications held by affiliate
companies managed by a single person for licenses expiring within the same timeframe and providing service within
the same geographic area).
40 Waiver Requests at 2.
41 Id.
42 See Anderson Communications, 16 FCC Red at 15022, f 7 (denying a request for waiver of the deadline for filing
renewal applications, in part, where the licensee did not identify any harm to public safety or consumer welfare that
would result from license termination); Peacock's Radio, 16 FCC Red at 15018, 7 (same).
43 See Anderson Communications, 16 FCC Rcd at 15022, 7 (stating that while the licensee provided a list of some
of its customers, it provided no showing that termination of service to those customers would leave them without
service alternatives or result in loss of unique service); Peacock 's Radio, 16 FCC Red at 15018, 7 (same); Gene A.
Smith, Order, 17 FCC Rcd 13366, 13367, 4 (CWD WTB 2002) (denying a request for waiver of the deadline for
filing renewal applications, in part, because the licensee did not show that termination of service to its customers
would leave them without service alternatives or result in loss of unique service); Western Communications, Inc.,
Order, 16 FCC Rcd 15240, 15241, 5 (CWD WTB 2001) (noting that while the licensee "mentions its customers,"
it provided no showing that termination of service to its customers would leave them without service alternatives or
result in loss of unique service).
44 See Bangor Hyvdro Decision, 25 FCC Rcd at 13314 (finding that the nature of the licensee's operations, the
monitoring and controlling the flow of electricity, by itself, does not justify a waiver of the deadline for filing
renewal applications); AlarmNet Decision, 24 FCC Red at 1768 (concluding that the role of the facilities in
maintaining safe and efficient operation of the licensee's monitoring systems, by itself, is insufficient to justify a
waiver of the deadline for filing renewal applications); ConocoPhillips Decision, 24 FCC Red at I 1757 (concluding
that even though the stations at issue might play an important role in maintaining the licensee's safe and efficient
operations, that, by itself, is insufficient to justify a waiver); Fresno City and County, 15 FCC Red at 11001, 1 8
(continued....)3989
Federal Communications Commission
DA 12-580
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
United States. Federal Communications Commission. FCC Record, Volume 27, No. 5, Pages 3728 to 4696, April 9 - April 27, 2012, book, April 2012; Washington D.C.. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc102307/m1/278/: accessed April 25, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.