AT&T Wireless (AWS) asked FCC to reduce ’significantly’ proposed ...

that when it realized that Enhanced Observed Time Difference (E-OTD) equipment would lag behind its limited GSM launches in 2001, “it did not identify this disparity as a development that rendered its waiver application substantially incomplete or inaccurate” in violation of FCC rules. Like other mobile carriers, AT&T Wireless and Cingular Wireless sought waivers last year from Commission for E911 Phase 2 location capability requirements that took effect Oct. 1. In case of GSM portions of Cingular and AT&T networks, agency said it received information on waiver requests too close to regulatory deadline to act on them. In response filed last week, AT&T said penalties proposed for its alleged violations of E-911 rules were “unjustified.” It said any violation of section of rules that required sale of at least one E-OTD handset starting in Oct. was minor. “Compliance with this rule was and is technically infeasible and the proposed forfeiture for this alleged violation should be eliminated entirely,” AT&T said. Carrier said that when it first submitted request to use E- OTD solution for Phase 2 for GSM part of its network it “reasonably believed” equipment would be available by deadline. “From the beginning, however, AWS viewed its waiver application as a statement of intent and plan of action, rather than a binding commitment to delay GSM deployment until E-OTD equipment became available,” AT&T said. Carrier told Commission it now was clear that agency expected it to disclose vendor delays in equipment availability “even before it knew the full scope of the problem or when and how it could be fixed.” AT&T said it needed to gather relevant data and develop solution before returning to FCC with presentation. In case of proposed forfeiture for alleged violation of deploying Phase 2 service within 6 months of request from public safety answering point, AT&T Wireless said that portion of fine should be reduced significantly “because the factual basis for the allegation is incorrect and any violation that did occur was minor.” Company argued it couldn’t have done anything to get E-OTD installed on its GSM network faster and that any delay in filing altered waiver request didn’t delay equipment rollout or harm public safety. Carrier took exception to notice that characterized its decision to not file modified waiver request earlier as “egregious misconduct.” Notice of apparent liability said that contrary to AT&T’s statement in original waiver petition, it had started to roll out its GSM network without location-capable handsets. FCC notice, which proposed $1.2 million fine for that portion of alleged violations, also said carrier had failed to make supplementary filing that informed Commission it would miss that part of Phase 2 deployment schedule.