FCC Record, Volume 26, No. 7, Pages 4843 to 5761, March 28 - April 08, 2011 Page: 5,009
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Federal Communications Commission
sought additional relief.42 Thus, Sprint must vacate its Interleaved Band spectrum in those regions by
March 31, 2011, as previously ordered.4 This will provide public safety with access to newly available
channels in those regions. We will issue a Public Notice at a later date to announce a filing window and
application procedures for these vacated channels.
15. Second, in the nine regions in which Sprint has sought waiver relief, we extend the
deadline for Sprint to vacate the Interleaved Band from March 31, 2011 to March 31, 2012. In all other
respects, the channel clearing procedures that we established in the 2010 Vacated Spectrum Waiver Order
remain in effect in the nine regions in which we grant Sprint relief. In taking these actions, we make no
finding regarding the degree to which Sprint's inability to vacate channels by prior deadlines is due to
factors within or beyond Sprint's control and defer consideration of such issues to a later date.44
16. We dismiss Smartcomm's and PSI's oppositions for lack of standing. Smartcomm
contends that it is entitled to standing because, as a potential licensee, it would be a competitor to Sprint
and could potentially receive interference from Sprint's facilities.45 PSI contends that it is entitled to
standing because its members are "poised to apply for available spectrum" and "intend to purchase SMR
and Business and Industrial and Land/Transportation operating systems and licenses within the
Interleaved Channels within the nine NPSPAC Regions with respect to which Sprint is seeking an
indefinite extension of its deadline to vacate its licenses within the Interleaved Band."' We disagree. It
is established that in order to obtain standing, PSI and Smartcomm must allege facts sufficient to
demonstrate that granting the waiver would cause them to suffer a direct injury47 The Commission has
consistently held that claims amounting to a "remote" or "speculative" injury are insufficient to confer
standing.48 PSl's and Smartcomm's claims based on hypothetical future applications for spectrum are too
remote and speculative to confer standing.
17. In the alternative, Smartcomm asks that its opposition be treated as an informal request
for Commission action under Section 1.41 of the Commission's rules. Acceptance of Smartcomm's
42 These NPSPAC Regions are: 14 - Indiana: 16 - Kansas; 19 - New England; 27 - Nevada; 28 -New Jersey,
Eastern Pennsylvania. Delaware; 31 - North Carolina; 34 - Oklahoma; 36 - Western Pennsylvania; 37 - South
Carolina; 39 - Tennessee; 42 - Virginia; 49 - Austin, Texas.
4 2010 Vacated Spectrum Waiver Order, 25 FCC Red at 3274 13. As provided in the 2008 Vacated Spectrum
Order, Sprint may remain on Interleaved Band channels in these regions past this date but must vacate any channel
on 60 days notice that a public safety licensee is prepared to commence operating on the channel. 2008 Vacated
Spectrum Order, 23 FCC Rcd at 15974 19. Sprint also may remain on Expansion Band and Guard Band channels
in each region until the relevant NPSPAC clearing threshold is reached. Id. 23 FCC Red at 15972-73 17. The
Expansion and Guard Band channels, however, will not be available for application until the Commission issues a
public notice to that effect.
44 See id. 23 FCC Red at 15971 16.
4s Smartcomm Opposition at 4 citing FCC v. Sanders Brothers. 309 U.S. 470, 477 (1940) and FCC v. National
Broadcasting Company, 319 U.S. 239, 247 (1943).
4" PSI Opposition at 3-4.
47 Wireless Co., L.P., Order, 10 FCC Rcd. 13233 (1995) citing Sierra Club v. Morton, 405 U.S. 727. 733 (1972).
See Lawrence N Brandt, 3 FCC Red. 4082 (1988); National Broadcasting Co, 37 FCC 2d 897, 898 (1972). See
also SunComn Mobile & Data, Inc. v. FCC, 87 F.3d 1386 (DC Cir. 1996) (future intent to purchase licenses
insufficient to establish standing under Article Ill).
48 Wireless Co., L.P., Order, 10 FCC Rcd 13233 citing KIRV Radio, 50 FCC2d 1010 (1975) (stating that "the claim
of potential economic injury by a mere applicant for a broadcast facility is too remote and speculative to show
standing as a 'party in interest"').
Here’s what’s next.
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 26, No. 7, Pages 4843 to 5761, March 28 - April 08, 2011, book, April 2011; Washington D.C.. (digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc52169/m1/181/: accessed September 21, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.