Clearwire 2008 Annual Report Download - page 35

s
e
lf
-trans
i
t
i
on to t
h
enew
b
an
d
p
l
an. T
h
e FCC a
d
opte
d
a proce
d
ure w
h
ere
b
yt
h
e proponent w
ill b
ere
i
m
b
urse
df
or
t
he value it adds to a market throu
g
h reimbursement b
y
other commercial operators in a market, on a pro-rata basis,
after the transition is completed and the FCC has been notified
.
Th
e FCC a
l
so c
l
ar
ifi
e
d
t
h
e proce
d
ure
b
yw
hi
c
h
BRS an
d
EBS
li
censees must
d
emonstrate su
b
stant
i
a
l
serv
i
ce,
and required them to demonstrate substantial service b
y
Ma
y
1, 2011. Substantial service showin
g
s demonstrate t
o
t
he FCC that a licensee is not warehousin
g
spectrum. If a BRS or EBS licensee fails to demonstrate substantia
l
s
erv
i
ce
b
y May 1, 2011,
i
ts
li
cense may
b
e cance
l
e
d
an
d
ma
d
eava
il
a
bl
e
f
or re-
li
cens
i
ng.
T
he FCC reaffirmed its decision to
p
ermit mobile satellite service
p
roviders to o
p
erate in the 249
6
t
o
2
5
00 MHz band on a shared, co-primar
y
basis with BRS licensees. It also concluded that spectrum sharin
g
in th
e
2496 to 2500 MHz band between BRS licensees and a limited number of incumbent licensees
,
such as broadcast
aux
ili
ar
y
serv
i
ce,
fi
xe
d
m
i
crowave an
d
pu
bli
csa
f
et
yli
censees,
i
s
f
eas
ibl
e. It t
h
ere
f
ore
d
ec
li
ne
d
to requ
i
re t
he
r
elocation of those incumbent licensees in the 2496 to 2
5
00 MHz band. Additionall
y
, the FCC reaffirmed its
c
onclusion that BRS licensees can share the 2496 to 2500 MHz band with industrial
,
scientific and medical devices
because such devices typically operate in a controlled environment and use frequencies closer to 2450 MHz. The
FCC also reaffirmed its decision to
p
ermit low-
p
ower, unlicensed devices to o
p
erate in the 26
55
to 2690 MHz band,
b
ut emp
h
as
i
ze
d
t
h
at un
li
cense
dd
ev
i
ces
i
nt
h
e
b
an
d
may not cause
h
arm
f
u
li
nter
f
erence to
li
cense
d
BRS operat
i
ons.
P
reviously, low-power, unlicensed devices were permitted to operate in the 2500 to 2655 MHz band, but not in the
26
55
to 26
9
0 MHz band.
Finall
y
, the FCC reaffirmed the application of its spectrum leasin
g
rules and policies to BRS and EBS, an
d
r
u
l
e
d
t
h
at new EBS spectrum
l
eases may prov
id
e
f
or a max
i
mum term (
i
nc
l
u
di
ng
i
n
i
t
i
a
l
an
d
renewa
l
terms) o
f
3
0
y
ears. The FCC further required that new EBS spectrum leases with terms of 1
5y
ears or lon
g
er must allow th
e
EBS licensee to review its educational use requirements ever
y
five
y
ears, be
g
innin
g
at the fifteenth
y
ear of the lease
.
On Marc
h
20, 2008, t
h
e FCC re
l
ease
d
a
f
urt
h
er or
d
er rev
i
s
i
n
g
,c
l
ar
ifyi
n
g
an
d
recons
id
er
i
n
g
certa
i
no
fi
ts BRS/
EBS ru
l
es as we
ll
as see
ki
n
g
comment on a
ddi
t
i
ona
l
matters. T
h
eor
d
er
g
enera
lly
a
ffi
rme
d
t
h
e tec
h
n
i
ca
l
ru
l
e
s
adopted b
y
the FCC in 2004 and modified in 2006, except for some minor ad
j
ustments. In addition, it clarified tha
t
li
censees s
h
ou
ld
use t
h
e “sp
li
tt
i
ng-t
h
e-
f
oot
b
a
ll
” met
h
o
d
o
l
ogy to
di
v
id
e over
l
app
i
ng geograp
hi
c serv
i
ce areas
f
o
r
EBS
li
censes t
h
at exp
i
re
d
an
d
are
l
ater re
i
nstate
d
.T
hi
s cou
ld i
mpact t
h
e
g
eo
g
rap
hi
c serv
i
ce areas
i
nw
hi
c
h
we are
able to deplo
y
service.
T
he FCC determined that it would use its existing auction rules to auction the over 70 unassigned BRS BTA
s
pectrum
li
censes. T
h
e FCC
h
as not
y
et esta
bli
s
h
e
d
a
d
ate
f
or t
hi
s auct
i
on. T
h
e FCC a
l
so re
i
nstate
d
aGu
lf
o
f
Mex
i
c
o
s
ervice area for the BRS band, the boundar
y
of which will be 12 nautical miles from the shore, which will be divided
i
nto three zones for licensing purposes. BRS licensees in the Gulf of Mexico will be subject to the same service and
t
ec
h
n
i
ca
l
ru
l
es t
h
at app
l
ytoa
ll
ot
h
er BRS
li
censees. T
hi
s may
h
ave an
i
mpact on C
l
earw
i
re’s a
bili
ty to
d
ep
l
o
y
s
ervice in areas near the Gulf of Mexico.
Finally, the FCC clarified that EBS leases executed before January 10, 200
5
cannot run in perpetuity and ar
e
limited to 1
5
years. In making this clarification, the FCC affirmed its general policy that it should not becom
e
e
nmes
h
e
di
n
i
nterpret
i
n
g
pr
i
vate contracts. In
di
scuss
i
n
gi
ts pr
i
or ru
li
n
g
s
g
overn
i
n
g
t
h
e max
i
mum EBS
l
ease term
,
t
he FCC referred to previous statements regarding EBS lease terms that it has never made before which may affect
s
ome o
f
our
l
ease r
i
g
h
ts
if
not su
b
sequent
l
y recons
id
ere
d
.T
h
ese w
ill h
ave an
i
mpact on some ex
i
st
i
ng
l
eases t
h
at
had been entered into prior to Januar
y
10, 2005. Petitions for reconsideration of this issue are currentl
y
pendin
g
.
T
he FCC sou
g
ht further comment on how to license the available and unassi
g
ned “white spaces” in the EB
S
s
pectrum
b
an
d
,
i
nc
l
u
di
ng w
h
et
h
er an
dh
ow to
li
cense EBS spectrum
i
nt
h
eGu
lf
o
f
Mex
i
co. T
h
e FCC note
d
t
h
at
p
u
bli
can
d
e
d
ucat
i
ona
li
nst
i
tut
i
ons t
h
at are e
ligibl
eto
h
o
ld
EBS
li
censes ma
yb
e constra
i
ne
df
rom part
i
c
i
pat
i
n
gi
n
c
ompet
i
t
i
ve
biddi
n
g
.T
h
ese
i
ssues rema
i
n unreso
l
ve
dby
t
h
e FCC.
We
b
e
li
eve t
h
at t
h
e FCC’s BRS/EBS ru
l
es w
ill
ena
bl
e us to pursue our
l
ong-term
b
us
i
ness strategy, a
l
t
h
oug
hi
t
i
s poss
ibl
et
h
at t
h
ese ru
l
es may
b
e
i
nterprete
di
n a manner mater
i
a
ll
ya
d
verse to our
b
us
i
ness. In a
ddi
t
i
on, t
h
ese ru
l
es
m
a
y
be amended in a manner that materiall
y
and adversel
y
affects our business
.
23