******************************************************** NOTICE ******************************************************** This document was converted from WordPerfect or Word to ASCII Text format. Content from the original version of the document such as headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers will not show up in this text version. All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the original document will not show up in this text version. Features of the original document layout such as columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins will not be preserved in the text version. If you need the complete document, download the WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version, if available. ***************************************************************** Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) TAMPA ELECTRIC COMPANY ) FCC File No. 746063 ) Request for Waiver and Application to ) Re-license Operational Fixed Microwave ) Radio Station License WHI718 with Primary ) Status ) ORDER Adopted: December 13, 1999 Released: December 16, 1999 By the Chief, Public Safety and Private Wireless Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau: I. INTRODUCTION 1. Tampa Electric Company (Tampa Electric) operates several fixed microwave services (FMS) radio stations in the 2 GHz band and inadvertently allowed the license for one of its stations to expire. Tampa Electric now has filed an application to re-license the same facility and requests a waiver of Section 101.81 of the Commission's Rules that would otherwise result in the station being authorized on a secondary basis. For the reasons stated herein, we deny Tampa Electric's request for a waiver of Section 101.81 of the Commission's Rules. II. BACKGROUND 2. The Commission has reallocated portions of the 2 GHz band from FMS to emerging technology (ET) services, including the personal communications services (PCS). To this end, the Commission has adopted certain transition rules. In doing so, the Commission balanced the needs of incumbent FMS licensees to continue to operate their systems with the need to conserve vacant 2 GHz spectrum for use by ET licensees, to provide ET licensees with a stable environment in which to plan and implement new services, and to prevent ET licensees from bearing any additional costs of relocating FMS licensees. Thus, rather than immediately clearing the 2 GHz band of the incumbent FMS users, the Commission permits the incumbents to continue to occupy the band on a co-primary basis with the ET licensees for a period of time, by the end of which the incumbents are to relocate to another portion of the spectrum. ET licensees have the option, however, of requiring the FMS incumbents to relocate sooner if the ET licensees pay the additional costs caused by the earlier relocation. Second, the Commission is authorizing new FMS stations and most modifications of FMS stations only on a secondary basis to ET systems. Most minor modifications of FMS stations are also authorized on a secondary status unless the licensee can demonstrate that it needs primary status and the modifications will not add to the relocation costs to be paid by the ET licensee. The result is that while incumbent FMS licensees are able to continue operating their systems with primary status as those systems currently exist any expansions and most modifications to the systems result in secondary status. 3. Tampa Electric is an electric utility serving approximately 1.5 million customers in the Tampa, Florida, metropolitan area. Station WHI718, Tampa, Florida, is the central hub of a nine-station FMS system that Tampa Electric operates to transmit voice and data communications in support of its electric operations. Due to an administrative oversight, Tampa Electric failed to renew the station's license in a timely manner; the license term therefore expired as of September 22, 1997. Tampa Electric was unaware of this until a routine audit of its licensing records in 1998. As a result of an internal inquiry into why it had failed to file a timely renewal, Tampa Electric learned that the Commission had cancelled the license in 1996. Tampa Electric searched its files and was unable to locate any records that would explain why Station WHI718 had been cancelled; inquiries to the Commission likewise failed to produce any records documenting the circumstances surrounding the cancellation of the license in 1996. Tampa Electric thus reasons that the license was allowed to expire because Tampa Electric never received a renewal notice, which occurred because the license had been cancelled. 4. Shortly after it realized that the license for Station WHI718 was no longer valid, Tampa Electric filed a request to operate the station under special temporary authority. Tampa Electric received special temporary authority on August 21, 1998, with the condition that such authority was with secondary status and subject to the provisions of ET Docket 92-9. On November 5, 1998, Tampa Electric filed an application for a new license for the station. The station had operated in the 2 GHz band and was originally authorized with primary status. In connection with its application, Tampa Electric requests a waiver of the Commission's Rules that provide that new FMS stations in the 2 GHz band will be authorized on a secondary basis to ET licensees. Tampa Electric thus seeks to have its facilities "re- licensed" with primary status. III. DISCUSSION 5. In this case, the station at issue was originally authorized with primary status, but that authorization has terminated. Tampa Electric now requests a waiver of the Rules so that its new station license can be accorded primary status. Section 1.925(b)(3) of the Commission's Rules provides that we may grant a request for waiver when (i) the underlying purpose of the rule(s) would not be served or would be frustrated by application to the instant case and a grant of the requested waiver would be in the public interest, or (ii) in view of the unique or unusual circumstances of the case, application of the rule would be inequitable, unduly burdensome or contrary to the public interest, or the applicant has no reasonable alternative. For the reasons set forth below, we conclude that grant of the requested waiver is not warranted. We, therefore, deny Tampa Electric's request for a waiver of the Rules. 6. Turning to the first of the two standards for deciding a waiver request, Tampa Electric argues that the primary purpose of the 2 GHz licensing rules is to ensure that the costs of relocation do not escalate beyond the level originally contemplated by the Commission. Tampa Electric states that because it had previously been licensed at the same location, it is not adding a "new" station, nor is it increasing the relocation costs beyond what they were at the time the Commission decided to reallocate the 2 GHz band from FMS to ET services. Further, Tampa Electric states that its station was still listed in the frequency coordinator's 2 GHz microwave data base, and that therefore no ET licensee could have detrimentally relied on the fact that Tampa Electric's license had expired. Tampa Electric therefore contends that the underlying purposes of the rules would not be served by applying the rules to its case. 7. We disagree. As we recently stated in Duke Power Company, the goals of the 2 GHz licensing rules are not only to limit relocation costs, as Tampa Electric argues, but also to clear the 2 GHz spectrum. In declining to expand the licensing policy, the Commission previously has stated that limiting primary site-by-site license grants is necessary to protect the interests of PCS (and other ET) licensees. Moreover, the Rules themselves demonstrate that limiting relocation costs is not the only purpose the rules serve. For example, all major modifications result in a 2 GHz FMS station being accorded secondary status, regardless of the effect on relocation costs. Further, licensees who make certain minor modifications must affirmatively justify primary status, not just show that the modifications will not add to relocation costs, in order to retain primary status. Thus, we believe that a determination as to whether grant of the requested waiver is warranted should not be limited solely to an analysis of the impact on potential relocation costs. 8. Tampa Electric also argues that the primary emphasis of the rules is with respect to the PCS portion of the 2 GHz band, and that its station is in the non-PCS portion. Indeed, argues Tampa Electric, its station was located in a portion of the spectrum that has not yet been targeted for a particular ET service. While Tampa Electric is correct that the primary focus of the Commission's decisions was on the PCS portion of the 2 GHz band, we do not believe that this is determinative of the outcome in this matter. As noted in Duke Power Company, "the Commission specifically applied the 2 GHz licensing rules to all portions of the 2 GHz band." Thus, we are not persuaded by Tampa Electric's argument that its operations in the non-PCS portion of the 2 GHz band is sufficient justification to waive the Commission's licensing rules. For these reasons, we conclude that Tampa Electric has not shown that the underlying purpose of the 2 GHz FMS licensing rules would not be served or would be frustrated by applying them to this case. 9. Turning to the second of the two standards for granting a waiver, Tampa Electric argues that this case presents unique or unusual circumstances that render application of the licensing rules inequitable, unduly burdensome, and contrary to the public interest. First, Tampa Electric contends that, but for the Commission's "clerical error" of cancelling the license in 1996, Tampa Electric would have received a renewal notice from the Commission in 1997 (and presumably would have timely filed its renewal). Implicit in this argument is the notion that a licensee's obligation to timely file a renewal is dependent upon the Commission's sending a renewal notice to the licensee. We disagree. Even if we excuse Tampa Electric's inaction in the face of the 1996 cancellation (for which no explanation appears in our licensing records), it is nonetheless true that each licensee is responsible for renewing its license prior to the license's expiration. Accordingly, "failure of a licensee to receive a [renewal form] from the Commission is no excuse for failure to file a renewal application." 10. Lastly, Tampa Electric contends that application of the rule to its case would be inequitable and unduly burdensome, because the station in question is paired with three other stations that are still licensed in the 2 GHz band, and, given the "technical inability to operate paired links in widely separated frequency bands," Tampa Electric "will be forced to either increase the cost and complexity of its system, impair its reliability, or incur the expense of changing out both the existing stations and the 'new' stations to a higher frequency" if the Commission does not re-license Station WHI718 in the 2 GHz band. That Station WHI718 is linked to other 2 GHz stations is not a unique or unusual circumstance. Thus, Tampa Electric is in no different situation in this respect from other licensees who have lost primary status for their FMS stations. Accordingly, we do not believe that Tampa Electric has demonstrated that its case presents unusual or unique circumstances such that it is entitled to a waiver of the Commission's Rules. IV. CONCLUSION 11. Tampa Electric's application to re-license the station at issue is a new application which, if granted, would be accorded secondary status pursuant to the Commission's Rules. For the reasons discussed above, Tampa Electric has not demonstrated how the Rules would be frustrated or how application of the Rules would be contrary to the public interest. We therefore deny Tampa Electric's request for a waiver of Section 101.81 of the Commission's Rules, and forward the application to the Public Safety and Private Wireless Division, Licensing and Technical Analysis Branch, for processing in accordance with the applicable Commission Rules. V. ORDERING CLAUSES 12. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED that pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 405 of the Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C.  154(i), 405, and Sections 1.925 and 101.69 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.925, 101.69, the Request for Waiver of Tampa Electric Company, filed on November 5, 1998, IS DENIED. 13. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Tampa Electric Company's pending application shall be processed in accordance with the applicable Commission Rules. 14. This action is taken under delegated authority pursuant to Sections 0.131 and 0.331 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.131, 0.331. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION D'wana R. Terry Chief, Public Safety and Private Wireless Division Wireless Telecommunications Bureau