Frontline Faces Heavy Criticism in 700 MHz Comments
Frontline’s plan was generally shot down in reams of comments filed on the proposed rules for the 700 MHz band. The plan “requires substantial revision,” said the National Public Safety Telecommunications Council (NPSTC). It’s not a “good idea to adopt service rules which essentially replicate one carrier’s business plan,” especially a business plan “which has not worked in the past,” said U.S. Cellular.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
When it came time to fight back, Frontline focused on Verizon Wireless, offering a comment directly aimed at Verizon Wireless’ attacks against it: “Verizon’s lost iPhone opportunity should provide a cautionary tale, Verizon’s customers will have to wait 5 years to use an iPhone… Waiting and waiting is not an answer when the emergency alarms go off,” it said in an e-mail. In its comments, backed by a report written by hired economists (WID May 23 p3), Frontline said it wants the FCC to mandate open access on all spectrum owned by the eventual E-block licensee. Open access promotes competition and innovation in wireless technology and services, said Frontline.
In addition to wanting changes to the Frontline plan, NPSTC wants the FCC to designate one public-safety licensee to control the 24 MHz of spectrum and to work with the E- block licensee. NPSTC would like specific rules, but since time is short it will settle for the public-safety licensee drafting “a statement of requirements” available to all prospective bidders for the E-block, it said. If the public- safety licensee and the E-block licensee can’t agree, it shouldn’t go to binding arbitration, it said: “At least as to the operation of the network in public-safety spectrum, the public safety licensee must have the last word.”
AT&T’s comments reflected the view expected from an incumbent wireless and broadband provider: It doesn’t want the FCC to impose eligibility restrictions to participate in the auction, wholesale requirements, and stringent build-out rules, but does want the Commission to allow for combinatorial bidding. The incumbent cable providers, filing as part of their joint agreement known as SpectrumCo, too are against stringent build-out requirements but they don’t want combinatorial bidding. Rural cellular carries, which originally proposed a “keep what you use” rule stressed this again in comments filed by the Rural Cellular Assn.
The FCC should be striving to foster competition, and open access is one way to do that, said the Center for Democracy & Technology: Whatever one may think about concepts like ‘Internet neutrality’ or ‘open access’ in the wireline context, the limited and high-value spectrum at issue in this auction presents a different case.”
A nationwide interoperable data public-safety network will never be built, said the O. Regional Planning Committee (ORPC). Reflecting the disagreement over wideband vs. broadband, ORPC said it was already planning to use wideband. Wideband is a based on a TIA standard but most of the technology is owned by Motorola, and it worked for years on the standard with public safety.