WPC 2BJ Courier3|X Times New Roman Bold P6G;PTimes New RomanHPLAS5L.PRS5x  @\\b&hX@2a6 ZF'3|c  HP LaserJet 4Si (Additional)HPLA4SAD.PRSC\  P6Q\&ibPCG TimesCG Times BoldCG Times Italic I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1. 1. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)2Ovp kyka8DocumentgDocument Style StyleXX` `  ` a4DocumentgDocument Style Style . a6DocumentgDocument Style Style GX  a5DocumentgDocument Style Style }X(# 2v&ta2DocumentgDocument Style Style<o   ?  A.  a7DocumentgDocument Style StyleyXX` ` (#` BibliogrphyBibliography:X (# a1Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:`S@ I.  X(# 2   & a2Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers C @` A. ` ` (#` a3DocumentgDocument Style Style B b  ?  1.  a3Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers L! ` ` @P 1. ` `  (# a4Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers Uj` `  @ a. ` (# 2  x @  a5Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers _o` `  @h(1)  hh#(#h a6Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbersh` `  hh#@$(a) hh#((# a7Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumberspfJ` `  hh#(@*i) (h-(# a8Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersyW"3!` `  hh#(-@p/a) -pp2(#p 2 rTech InitInitialize Technical Style. k I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 Technicala1DocumentgDocument Style Style\s0  zN8F I. ׃  a5TechnicalTechnical Document Style)WD (1) . a6TechnicalTechnical Document Style)D (a) . 2+&a2TechnicalTechnical Document Style<6  ?  A.   a3TechnicalTechnical Document Style9Wg  2  1.   a4TechnicalTechnical Document Style8bv{ 2  a.   a1TechnicalTechnical Document StyleF!<  ?  I.   2]3&Ya7TechnicalTechnical Document Style(@D i) . a8TechnicalTechnical Document Style(D a) . Doc InitInitialize Document Stylez   0*0*0*  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)DocumentgPleadingHeader for Numbered Pleading PaperE!n    X X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:captioncaption1;1#XP\  P6QXP##C\  P6QP#_Equation Caption_Equation Caption211#XP\  P6QXP##C\  P6QP#"i~'^09CSS999S]+9+/SSSSSSSSSS//]]]Ixnnxg]xx9?xgxx]xn]gxxxxg9/9MS9ISISI9SS//S/SSSS9?/SSxSSIP!PZ9+ZM999+99999999S/xIxIxIxIxIlnIgIgIgIgI9/9/9/9/xSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxIxSxRxSxSxS]SxIxIxInInInZnIxigIgIgIgIxSxSxSxZxSxZxS9/9S999Su]ZZxSg/gCg9g9g/xSbxSxSxSxSxn9n9n9]?]?]?]ZgFg/gMxSxSxSxSxSxSxxZgIgIgIxSg9xS]?g9xSi+SS88WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN/>/>/>/x]SSSSx]x]x]x]xSxSx]SSxSxSf]xSxSxSxIxIxWxIx{nInInInISSSWS]a?/?]?9?]]WW]n/nKn9nCn/x]xx]x]SSxxIxIxI]?]?]?]WnUn9nax]x]x]x]x]x]xxWnInInIx]n9x]]?n9xSz+SS8-8WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNI\\>>>\g0>03\\\\\\\\\\33gggQyyrg>Frgygrr>3>T\>Q\Q\Q>\\33\3\\\\>F3\\\\QX%Xc>0cT>>>0>>>>>>>>\3QQQQQwyQrQrQrQrQ>3>3>3>3\\\\\\\\\\Q\Z\\\g\QQQyQyQycyQtrQrQrQrQ\\\c\c\>3>\>>>\gcc\r3rIr>r>r3\l\\\\y>y>y>gFgFgFgcrMr3rT\\\\\\crQrQrQ\r>\gFr>\t0\\=!=WxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNBnnBT\>Q\\\\\3;\7;\7>>QQ\??n\\pBnnBmgg>Q\7"yyyy\njc\gnn\f\yIy>z\fgffg\yQzQyQfz\ff\z\\}=\\===WxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN\\\=\NN\\\\\\@\\\\@==ii\00\\nn\\\sff=i\@"\i\\==n=\\f\z\=\Q\i~XznNm\\\====nzfnfzQzGzQQQG3QzffQz\Qnn\n\\zQQznfnnnzG\nQnnnn==\\\\\\\n=n\Q=Tgnj}}ccyyTjcc;T;TXFu"i~'^5>g\\>>>\g0>03\\\\\\\\\\>>ggg\yyrF\yrgyy>3>j\>\gQgQ>\g3>g3g\ggQF>g\\\QI(I_>0_j>>>0>>>>>>\>g3\\\\\QyQyQyQyQD3D3D3D3g\\\\gggg\\g\\\\pg\\\QQ_QyQyQyQyQ\\\_\gjF3FgF>Fgg__gy3ySy>yIy3ggg\\QQQgFgFgFg_y^y>yjgggggg_yQyQyQgy>ggFy>\0\\=2=WxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNBnnBa\>\\\\\\7>\7>\7>>\\\??n\\pBnnBsgg>\\7"yyyy\nlc\gnn\bbnnnb7%%nnnnnOBnbOOOOOOOOOO%n7O7=7bnOnI7%7O17?OVGnnOOOOOOOOOOnnnnn3nOOOOnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnOOnnnnnnZIBVnOnnn/AOOOOnnnnnnOOO7OOnOOnnnOOO1OOOO1OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO%OOO%OOO%OOO%OOOOOOOOOOOOOOBE=B=I1E+G1Q7O1%M1I=d=Q1I7O1OB?7B77E1O1IBO=VBBBOEQ%7OOOB1BBBB%%7777OQ777OOOB%?71%nnr}c3wc}}yMMc>Bwgwgcccccc@XKKgg;;c\\\{I\waaIZQQOMXacccujygggpeyuVrQjQcccc3Qlc@uuccc;;ccccccccccccccccccccccnnnnnnnn#3#cccccj3cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccrrrrnnnnnnnnnnXXccccccllccVVVVuuccaaaaccZZuZVVVV5*FVcc2ȎKrKwK}K"i~'^5>M\\>>>\}0>03\\\\\\\\\\>>}}}\rryrr>Qygyrr\grrggF3FM\>\\Q\Q3\\33Q3\\\\FF3\QyQQFI3Ic>0cM>>>0>>>>>>\>\3r\r\r\r\r\yyQrQrQrQrQ>3>3>3>3y\\\\\\\\\gQr\\\\gQ\r\r\r\r\yQyQycyQnrQrQrQrQ\\\c\c\>3>\>>>\\ccyQg3gBg>g;g3y\jy\y\\\yrFrFrF\F\F\FccgBg3gM\\\\\\ygcgFgFgF\g>y\\Fg>g\n0\\=(=WddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddNBnnB_\F\\\\\\3;\7;\7>>gg\??n\\pBnnBb\\>g\7"yyyy\njc\}nn\dddH%7777777777>>>0eOIIOD>OO%*ODaOO>OI>DOOgOOD%%37%07070%777V7777%*77O77055;%;3%%%%%%%%%%%7O0O0O0O0O0aHI0D0D0D0D0%%%%O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O0O7O6O7O7O7>7O0O0O0I0I0I;I0OED0D0D0D0O7O7O7O;O7O;O7%%7%%%7M>;;O7DD,D%D%DO7AO7O7O7O7aOI%I%I%>*>*>*>;D.DD3O7O7O7O7O7O7gOO;D0D0D0O7D%O7>*D%O7E77%%WMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN(BB(37%07777j7#TT7!#TT7T!%%007n&&Bn77lCTn(nBB(A\\>>n%07\n!"IIIITTenn7TnB@;7>lBBn7哓S88xdxxxxxxxxxx8SdS]SxoS8SxJS`xkxxxxxxxxxxMxxxxxxodxGcxxxxxxxSxxxxxxxJxxxxJxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx8xxx8xxx8xxx8xxxxxxxxxxxxxddd]d]oJd?]JxSxJ8.oJo]]oJoSxJxddSdSS]J]Jodd]dddddx8Sx]]dJdddd88SSSSdxSSS]]]d8`SJ8Muu]daqqZZnn{{xu{{M{aZZ5M5M҅P?k"i~'^"(22TN"""28"2222222222888,\HBBH>8HH"&H>XHH8HB8>HH^HH>"".2",2,2,"222N2222"&22H22,006"6."""""""""""2H,H,H,H,H,XAB,>,>,>,>,""""H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H,H2H1H2H2H282H,H,H,B,B,B6B,H?>,>,>,>,H2H2H2H6H2H6H2""2"""2F866H2>>(>">">H2;H2H2H2H2XHB"B"B"8&8&8&86>*>>.H2H2H2H2H2H2^HH6>,>,>,H2>"H28&>"H2?22!!WFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN$<<$.2",2222`2 LL2 LL2L"",,2d"" )E {O^'ЍId. This constraint resulted in the layoff of several public safety and administration workers as of July 1, 1998. Moreover, Revere contends that safety would be compromised since the mobile units of other departments within the City of Revere are not capable of narrowband technology and would not  S 'be able to communicate with the Revere Police Department on narrowband channels.C? F)E {Oh'ЍId. at 14.C  S2'#&a\  P6G;0&P# 20. Public Interest. After full consideration of the record in this proceeding we find that strict application of the Commission's rules under the circumstances presented here would be contrary to the public interest. In this connection, we note that the petitioner is a public safety entity. Further, we conclude that the petitioner has demonstrated an extraordinary circumstance, lack of reasonable alternatives, and resultant irreparable harm if the requested relief is not granted.  SD' 21. The Bureau's decision in this case is consistent with Commission precedent in the similar  S'matter of the New York City Transit Authority (NYC Transit).@)E {O'ЍSee In the Matter of New York City Transit Authority, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 4 FCC Rcd 4488  {O^'(1989) (NYC Transit). NYC Transit received three Commission authorizations for 20 trunked channels in the Land Transportation Radio Service. Under  S'the provisions of Section 90.629 of the Commission's Rules,HA4 )E yO"'Ѝ47 C.F.R. 90.629.H NYC Transit was afforded three years in which to place its system into operation. The Bureau notified NYC Transit of its failure to meet the conditions of its authorizations, and informed NYC Transit that its licenses had been cancelled. NYC Transit timely filed a petition for reconsideration of the cancellation and requested reinstatement of its license. The Bureau granted NYC Transit's Petition for Reconsideration and Reinstatement, on the basis that NYC Transit's proposed system was unique, involving the safety of millions of" A,N(N(ZZN" passengers on thousand of buses, and that it was totally dependent upon retention of the 20 channels  S'which were at issue.B)E {O@'ЍSee In the Matter of New York City Transit Authority, Petition for Reconsideration and Reinstatement, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 3 FCC Rcd 5621 (1988). While acknowledging procedural and other deficiencies on the part of NYC Transit, the Bureau determined that significant public interest considerations favored reinstatement of  S'the license.DC")E {OJ'ЍId. at 5622.D  S8' 22. #&a\  P6G;0&P#Comtran Associates, Inc. (Comtran), an existing licensee of a 20 channel 800 MHz trunked Specialized Mobile Radio (SMR) station in the New York City area, filed an Application for Review of the Bureau's grant to NYC Transit. Comtran asserted that it was at the top of the waiting list for reclaimed trunked SMR channels in the New York City area, but was unlikely to receive any channels through the Commission's waiting list procedure. Comtran argued that its only source of additional  Sp'channels under the circumstances was through the Commission's intercategory sharing procedure.jDp)E {O'ЍSee NYC Transit, 4 FCC Rcd at 4488, para 2.j  SH '#&a\  P6G;0&P#On review, the Commission held that "public interest considerations outweighed administrative  S 'shortcomings."NE F)E {O'ЍId. at 4489, para. 12.N In summary, the Commission affirmed the Bureau's reinstatement action and denied  S 'Comtran's Application for Review, concluding that the Bureau's decision was in the public interest.TF )E {Op'ЍId. at 4489, paras. 14 & 15.T  S ' 23. Similarly, in 1997, in the case of Keller Communications, Inc. v. Federal Communications  S 'Commission (Keller),G j )E {O'ЍSee Keller Communications, Inc. v. FCC, 130 F.3d 1073 (D.C. Cir. 1997). the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upheld the  S\'Commission's decision to waive the defects in a city's application. The Court held that the Commission may exercise its waiver authority to fulfill its mandate to promote public safety of life  S 'and property.DH  )E {O'ЍId. at 1077.D  In Keller, the Commission waived defects in the application of Lewisville, Texas, to add a neighboring town's conventional radio channel to the city's trunked radio system, based primarily upon public safety considerations. The Commission found that absent the waiver, the City of Lewisville would have "an overloaded public safety communications system" and also would be unable to accommodate the public safety needs of a neighboring community whose communications services it had agreed to assume. Under these circumstances, the Court ruled that the waiver was well  S'within the Commission's authority. The Keller Court cited the Commission's waiver regulations, which provide that agency rules "may be suspended, revoked, amended, or waived for good cause  S'shown, in whole or in part, at any time by the Commission."EI )E yO$'Ѝ47 C.F.R. 1.3.E  S' 24. The Bureau's decision in this case is also consistent with the Universal Licensing System reinstatement approach recently adopted by the Commission, where the Commission stated that its"X I,N(N(ZZ" treatment of latefiled renewal applications should take into consideration the complete facts and circumstances involved, including the length of the delay in filing, the performance record of the licensee, the reasons for the failure to timely file, and the potential consequences to the public if the  S'license were to terminate.hJ)E {O'ЍSee ULS Reconsideration at para. 22.h  S8' 25. While we conclude that the totality of the circumstances warrants reinstatement of Revere's license for the subject frequency pair, we nonetheless strongly caution licensees that the Bureau's decision in this particular matter does not excuse entities, including public safety entities, from complying with the Commission's Rules regarding filing renewal applications in a timely manner. We emphasize that even if a licensee is engaged in public safety activities, a lesser degree of diligence in  Sp'complying with our renewal procedures is not justified.TK\pZ)E {Oj 'ЍSupra note 46. In this connection we note that in the appropriate case, the FCC will exercise its forfeiture  {O4 'authority to sanction public safety entities that fail to exercise diligence when renewing licenses.  See 47 U.S.C. 503; 47 C.F.R. 1.80. T The grant of the instant Petition is in the public interest and takes into consideration petitioner's critical need for the frequencies and all of the facts and unique circumstances surrounding the particular extraordinary situation before us.  S ' IV. CONCLUSION AND ORDERING CLAUSES  S ' 26. We find that setting aside ADF's authorization to operate on frequency pair 470/473.8625 MHz is in the public interest. To fulfill the Congressional mandate of protecting the public safety, we believe that setting aside ADF's November 19, 1997, grant and reinstating the City of Revere's  S'authorization to operate Station KCZ967 is necessary and well within the Commission's authority.JL~)E yO&'ԍ47 U.S.C. 151, 332(a)(1).J We conclude, therefore, that a grant of Revere's Petition and reinstatement of its authorization is warranted given the extraordinary situation before us. We believe to deny City of Revere's requested relief would create an emergency situation in which police, fire and medical units would lose communications service which is vital to the health and safety of an entire populous community.  S'#&a\  P6G;0&P# 27. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 405 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 405, and Section 1.106 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. 1.106, the petition for reconsideration filed by the City of Revere, Massachusetts on December 9, 1997, IS HEREBY GRANTED. Additionally, the application filed by the Revere Police Department to continue public safety operations on frequency pair 470/473.8625 MHz, under call sign  SP'KCZ967, IS HEREBY GRANTED.MP)E {O!'ЍSee FCC File No. A007659 filed by the Revere Police Department on December 8, 1997. ADF's authorization to operate Station WPLQ307 is HEREBY  S('SET ASIDE.N()E yOh$'ЍA hearing designation order designating ADF's application No. A007179 for hearing is not required. The Revere Police Department timely filed the Revere letter within 30 days of ADF's November 19, 1997, grant. " N,N(N(ZZ"Ԍ  S'28. This action is taken under delegated authority pursuant to Sections 0.131 and 0.331 of the  S'Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. 0.131, 0.331. pp  *xxX (#(#  S8' hhCFEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION  Sp' hhCKathleen O'Br E'Ja i E'Ja  E'Ja  E'Ja e E'Ja  E'Jau  E'Ja n E'Ja  E'Jae  E'Ja   E'Ja  E'Ja H E'Ja  E'Ja a E'Ja  E'Ja m E'Ja   SH ' hhC E'Ja Deputy  E'Ja Chief, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau