Narrowbanding waivers

Status
Not open for further replies.

radioman2001

Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
2,858
Location
New York North Carolina and all points in between
I don't see this as caving in, the FCC is requesting additional information on applications. (the database they are creating at the licensees expense as usual) We all knew that the FCC wouldn't stand fast with this, especially with the current fiscal situation nationwide. I bet even the Feds are having trouble meeting their deadline. I know Amtrak is.
 

GTR8000

NYS Database Guy
Database Admin
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
9,292
Location
BEE00
St Louis was granted a narrowband waiver yesterday. This is very significant news, I believe it might be the first waiver granted.

This is just a snippet of the order, the bottom line. There are conditions attached to the waiver, so it's worth reading the entire order.

Based on the foregoing, we conclude that grant of the requested waiver is in the public
interest subject to the conditions discussed herein. Accordingly, we grant Petitioners a waiver of the
Commission’s January 1, 2013 VHF/UHF narrowbanding deadline until December 31, 2013
http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2012/db0221/DA-12-245A1.pdf
 

radioman2001

Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
2,858
Location
New York North Carolina and all points in between
I read it, and as I said it appears as though the FCC is looking for the frequencies that are going to be turned in as a condition of that waiver. That waiver type may not be what a lot of agencies who are looking for relief are going to. It is a specific one where multiple agencies are vacating frequencies(maybe) for a regional radio system. It may bring a lot of frequencies to avaliablity, but if everyone is going 800 as in this case, why would you need them? It would be interesting to see if all those agencies actually do relinquish their old channels or thought this (waiver) would be a way of extending their use.
 

W6KRU

Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
3,408
Location
Oceanside, CA
I read it, and as I said it appears as though the FCC is looking for the frequencies that are going to be turned in as a condition of that waiver. That waiver type may not be what a lot of agencies who are looking for relief are going to. It is a specific one where multiple agencies are vacating frequencies(maybe) for a regional radio system. It may bring a lot of frequencies to avaliablity, but if everyone is going 800 as in this case, why would you need them? It would be interesting to see if all those agencies actually do relinquish their old channels or thought this (waiver) would be a way of extending their use.
Specifically, we recommend that licensees seeking waivers ensure that their submissions include,
or are amended to include, a definitive list of the frequencies for which they are seeking a waiver, a list of
frequencies that will be relinquished (if applicable, e.g., if the licensee intends to migrate to the 700 MHz
or 800 MHz band and relinquish VHF/UHF spectrum), and representations from all licensees covered by
the waiver request that they have committed to take any actions that form the basis for the waiver
justification.

It doesn't look like relinquishing of current frequencies is a requirement.
 

GTR8000

NYS Database Guy
Database Admin
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
9,292
Location
BEE00
It doesn't look like relinquishing of current frequencies is a requirement.
Read the St Louis waiver order at the link I posted. It specifically states as a condition of the waiver that frequencies must be relinquished.

IV. CONCLUSION

14. Based on the foregoing, we conclude that grant of the requested waiver is in the public interest subject to the conditions discussed herein. Accordingly, we grant Petitioners a waiver of the Commission’s January 1, 2013 VHF/UHF narrowbanding deadline until December 31, 2013, subject to the following conditions: (1) within ninety days of the release of this Order, any licensee in the St. Louis Urban Area seeking to have the waiver apply to its facilities must file a letter in ULS confirming that it consents to the terms of this Order and agrees to be bound by them; and (2) within six months of the release of this Order, Petitioners must file with the Commission a list of VHF/UHF frequencies and/or licenses that will be relinquished.
 
Last edited:

W6KRU

Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
3,408
Location
Oceanside, CA
So is the relinquishment a condition of the St. Louis waiver or all waivers? I can't see NY being held to that requirement but I definitely could be wrong.
 

GTR8000

NYS Database Guy
Database Admin
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
9,292
Location
BEE00
I think you're right that it's probably not an absolute requirement to get a waiver, but I just don't see the FCC granting many waivers without some compromise from petitioners. I think the St Louis waiver with the VHF/UHF givebacks is probably going to be the rule, not the exception. Time will tell I guess.
 

902

Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2003
Messages
2,433
Location
Downsouthsomewhere
Waivers are not a cookie-cutter process. Each is manually evaluated by FCC staffers, many of whom are JDs, and may be accepted, accepted in part, conditionally accepted pending more information (like the East-West Gateway waiver request), or dismissed. No guarantees. They are all different and offer different reasons for asking.

The biggest problem has been that licensees migrate to another band and still find a reason to hoard their lower frequencies. A regional planning committee has no authority to make them cancel their lower frequency liceses (effectively giving them back). So this played a part in the St. Louis region showing public benefit.

The other thing to note with STL is that EWG is NOT a licensee (they had a license for their MEDCOMM program, which they unbolted and disassembled when grants funding for it ran out; it was dubious whether they qualified as a 90.20 eligible entity when they got it). The FCC is requiring each entity claiming this waiver to write in and let them know exactly which licenses are relevant, what they intend to give back, and what they intend to keep (ostensibly common channels for mutual aid... and nothing more). So this comes with strings attached.
 

com501

Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2003
Messages
1,317
Location
127.0.0.1
Really?

Got some documentation of that?

Monterey County hasn't even planned their sites yet. Their advisory committee is still meeting and they don't have much infrastructure equipment on order. PLUS, the fire departments aren't wanting to go to the county trunked system, for obvious reasons.
 

georgeg38930

Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2005
Messages
7
Location
Mississippi
Narrowbanding

Well I think its a waste of time and money. Things are working just fine and all this change is crazy. I have worked in a small department for 24 years and we just do not have the money for the change of equipment. What we have works just fine. Why Why Why??????

Not only new radios but new repeaters and frequency change.
 

DPD1

Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2005
Messages
1,994
What's funny is that, around here (major urban area), the 150-170 chunk is like a ghost town now, compared to 15-20 years ago. It's like abandoning a supposedly sinking ship, just to sit in the row boats and watch it sail off by itself, empty. lol
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top