Almost a year ago we reported on the adoption of a number of rules designed to improve performance of the 911 system in the aftermath of the 2012 “derecho” storm. Most of the new rules had taken effect by February of this year, but a couple...
Our friend Michael Marcus has been busy. Lucky for us. We recently reported on a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) seeking input on the possible use of millimeter wave frequencies (i.e., 24 GHz and north) for mobile communications. Our friend, Michael Marcus, a ...
Readers will recall that, last spring, the Commission decided that certain TV joint sales agreements (JSAs) may create attributable interests for the purposes of determining compliance with the multiple ownership rules. And, thanks to that change, JSAs...
Meanwhile, back at the ranch …
While the NAB and Sinclair press their appeal of the Commission’s Incentive Spectrum Auction Report and Order (R&O), a number of other folks have expressed their discontent with various aspects of the R&O in petitions for reconsideration that the FCC will have to address and resolve. A list of those petitions has been published in the Federal Register. That notice sets the deadlines for oppositions and replies. Oppositions to any or all of these petitions must be filed by November 12, 2014; replies to any oppositions are due by November 21.
More than 30 separate petitions have been filed on behalf of:
You can take a look at the various petitions on ECFS – just go to the ECFS Search page and enter “12-268” in the “Proceeding Number” box and, in the “Type of Filing” box in the “Advanced Options” sections, select “Petition for Reconsideration from the drop-down menu. (Note that the list in the Federal Register does not correspond exactly to the petitions available on ECFS, but it’s reasonably close. One apparent omission: When we performed the ECFS search, it turned up a petition filed on behalf of Sprint that isn’t listed in the Federal Register notice.)
After the FCC has ruled on these petitions, interested parties will have the opportunity to seek judicial review of the FCC's reconsideration order. If (as may reasonably be expected) this leads to more appeals on the spectrum auction front, there's no telling what impact that might have on the start date of the auctions. As we reported last week, the anticipated start has already moved from 2015 to "early 2016" because of (among other things) the already-pending NAB and Sinclair appeals.
Check back here for updates.
High on the superstar's wish list: Increased video description services. Yes, you heard it right! Stevie Wonder, the legendary songwriter and recording artist, made the rounds, live and in person, at the FCC recently. He met with the Chairman and the o...
More from our "Mother May I" file
We have reported regularly on the plight of an applicant who has been denied 14 times in his efforts to get the FCC to grant the same two sets of applications. Given our previous attention to this, we would be remiss if we didn’t update our readers on the latest, if perhaps unsurprising, development: the applicant’s 15th try has been denied.
As readers may recall, after the 11th adverse ruling, the FCC forbade this particularly persistent party from again asking for reconsideration without first getting the Commission’s permission. That, of course, led to three more rounds. In the last (that would be the 14th) rejection, the Commission was none too subtle. It advised the applicant that “he should not expect further administrative review” and, presumably for emphasis, declared not once, but twice, that the “proceeding is now terminated.”
As if.
Much like that last guest who lingers at a party despite the host’s best efforts to close things down, the applicant declined to take the hint. Along with the by-now-requisite request for permission to file, he filed yet another petition for reconsideration.
This time around the Commission didn’t bother to tell him what he might or might not expect. “Reconsideration is denied” was all the FCC had to say, although it did helpfully add that, if the applicant still feels aggrieved, “he may seek judicial review from a court of competent jurisdiction”.
Whether the FCC actually expects, or even wants, him to head to court is unclear, but it presumably would prefer that he go somewhere, anywhere, other than back to the Commission, again. If the FCC really would like this applicant to seek judicial review, it might want to provide him with a list of courts of competent jurisdiction, along with their addresses. Look for such a list – and, who knows, maybe even a check to cover the appellate filing fee – in the order denying the next request, should one be filed. We’ll let you know.
In late September we reported on the FCC’s request for comments about its proposed “TV Broadcaster Relocation Fund Reimbursement Form”. That’s the form that the Commission plans to use when, after the incentive spectrum auctions...
Even though October 1 – and the triennial election between must-carry and retransmission consent that had to be made by then – may be fading in our rear views, TV licensees and cable operators still have much to think about. Tying down the ...
Slowly but surely, the new set of rigorous requirements for 911 system service providers adopted last December in the wake of the 2012 “derecho” storm are coming on line. Most of those requirements took effect in February, but four par...