|In the Matter of Amendment of the Commission's Rules Regarding Installment Payment Financing for Personal Communications Services (PCS) Licensees, WT Docket No. 97-82, Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking|
I concur with the issuance of this Further Notice to explore changes in the eligibility rules for the re-auction of this valuable and highly sought-after PCS spectrum. I support the need to reexamine our "entrepreneur's block" spectrum set-aside rules because, among other reasons, there have been a lot of changes since we first embarked on this auction experiment. However, I am open to all options and considerations for the next auction of these licenses. I am not particularly impressed by labels attached to the specific proposals (i.e., those on which we "seek comment," "propose" or "tentatively conclude") in this Further notice because I think all options are on the table and I would not be predisposed to any particular outcome at this time.
I am very dismayed that this Further Notice proposes to reject out-of-hand any modification or elimination of the CMRS spectrum cap. Even since we last addressed this issue, many changes in the marketplace have occurred that require the immediate reexamination of this artificial barrier (like the entrepreneur's block eligibility restrictions) to the acquisition of spectrum. If we are not going to adequately address it in this proceeding (despite the fact that parties have asked us to), I strongly urge action on the reconsideration petitions from the last review and the conclusion of the year 2000 biennial review before this re-auction takes place. In the meantime, or if my plea to my colleagues goes unheeded, I would also encourage spectrum-constrained licensees to make a compelling effort to justify their need to exceed the cap or other reasons it should be waived.