******************************************************** NOTICE ******************************************************** This document was converted from WordPerfect to ASCII Text format. Content from the original version of the document such as headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers will not show up in this text version. All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the original document will not show up in this text version. Features of the original document layout such as columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins will not be preserved in the text version. If you need the complete document, download the WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version, if available. ***************************************************************** Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) SCHLUMBERGER TECHNOLOGY CORP. ) File No. D073966 ) Waiver of 47 C.F.R.  90.35(b)(3) ) ORDER Adopted: February 17, 1999 Released: February 18, 1999 By the Chief, Public Safety and Private Wireless Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau: I. INTRODUCTION 1. On February 27, 1997, Schlumberger Technology Corporation ("Schlumberger") filed a Form 600 Application seeking to use frequencies in the 66-82 MHz range in its seismic oil and natural gas explorations. This frequency range encompasses the 72-76 MHz band which is currently available for seismic telemetry operations, and frequency bands allocated to TV Channel 4 (66-72 MHz) and TV Channel 5 (76-82 MHz). Schlumberger's application was accompanied by a request for waiver of Section 90.75(b) of the Commissions Rules ("Waiver Request"). For the reasons discussed below, this Order denies the Waiver Request and dismisses the above-captioned application. II. BACKGROUND 2. Schlumberger states that it is engaged in the exploration for oil and natural gas. It contends that current seismic telemetry systems do not provide adequate, real-time seismic channel capacity, which results in system cycle time limitations. To resolve this problem, Schlumberger states that it has participated in the development of an improved seismic data recovery system known as Digiseis. According to Schlumberger, the Digiseis system operates in the 66-82 MHz band and has the channel capacity necessary to meet the requirements of today's two- and three-dimensional seismic surveys, and thus improve oil and gas exploration technology. Schlumberger indicates that it has been operating the Digiseis system for several years under a Part 5 Experimental Radio Service authorization from the Commission. Now that testing and development of the Digiseis system has been completed, Schlumberger desires to obtain an authorization for regular operation of the Digiseis equipment under Part 90. 3. Schlumberger filed a Form 600 Application that included the Waiver Request for waiver of Section 90.35(b)(3) of the Commission's Rules in order to permit operation of its seismic telemetry system generally on 200-300 frequencies in the 66-82 MHz band. Schlumberger requests authorization to operate up to 500 low power, temporary fixed, telemetry transmitters in the 66.00-72.98 MHz and 75.42-82.00 MHz bands, and a single higher powered control transmitter on 72.04 and 75.936 MHz. A waiver is required because the Digiseis system currently operates on spectrum allocated to TV Channels 4 and 5, which is not available for use under Part 90. 4. In support of its request, Schlumberger contends that its seismic operations will take place in remote areas, normally well removed from any TV receivers. Schlumberger further contends that the low transmitter powers, when compared to the power level of a TV station, will not cause any interference to TV Channel 4 or 5 reception. Further, Schlumberger states that in the unlikely event that interference occurs, it "will act immediately to eliminate the interference by discontinuing operation of the offending transmitter(s) and/or changing frequency." III. DISCUSSION 5. Pursuant to Section 1.925(b)(3) of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.925(b)(3), waiver requests may be granted if the applicant shows that either the underlying purpose of the rule would not be served or would be frustrated by application in a certain case and that a waiver would serve the public interest; or that due to unique or unusual factual circumstances in a given case, application of a rule would be inequitable, unduly burdensome, or contrary to the public interest, or that the applicant has no reasonable alternative. Based upon our review of the Waiver Request, we conclude that Schlumberger has not demonstrated that its request meets any of these requirements. 6. We are concerned that Schlumberger has not adequately analyzed the interference potential associated with its proposed operations. Schlumberger seemingly suggests that its operations generally will be outside of areas containing television operations. A review of the licensing database indicates broadcast television (both analog and digital), television translators and low power television operations using TV Channels 4 and 5 within the areas to be covered under Schlumberger's requested waiver. Consequently, we are concerned that given the extent of such television operations, the interference potential appears to be substantially greater than that described by Schlumberger. As a result, we are not convinced that Schlumberger's representation that it would act immediately to eliminate actual interference is adequate under such circumstances. Consequently, we cannot conclude that the public interest would be served by grant of the requested waiver. 7. Further, we do not believe Schlumberger has provided sufficient justification to support grant of a blanket waiver in this case. The bands in question here are allocated to the TV Broadcast Service. Because of the nature of this service and the number of different types of television operations (such as low power television and television translators), the Commission generally has permitted non-broadcast operations on a regular basis in TV bands only after going through a notice and comment rulemaking proceeding. The Waiver Request does not sufficiently address why a waiver rather than a rulemaking is more appropriate. It appears that use of the Digiseis system involves a transformation in how radio spectrum is used generally in the acquisition of land seismic data, namely a requirement for wide spectrum bandwidth. While Schlumberger selected the 66-82 MHz band for development of the Digiseis system, it has not presented any rationale as to why this band as opposed to other Part 90 frequency bands, is uniquely suited for such operations. In fact, we believe that our accommodation of these industry trends regarding use and needs of radio spectrum is a matter more appropriately handled in the context of a rule making proceeding rather than by a waiver. Thus, we find that Schlumberger has failed to demonstrate unique or factual circumstances or that it has no reasonable alternative. 8. For the reasons discussed above, we conclude that Schlumberger has not demonstrated sufficiently that grant of the Waiver Request is warranted. Thus, we deny the Waiver Request. Additionally, applications may be dismissed if the accompanying petition for waiver of the Commission's Rules does not set forth reasons which, sufficient if true, would justify a waiver or exception. In light of our disposition of the Waiver Request, we find that Schlumberger's associated application should be dismissed. IV. ORDERING CLAUSES 9. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED pursuant to section 4(i) of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C.  154(i) and Section 90.151 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  90.151, that the Waiver Request filed by Schlumberger Technology Corp. on February 27, 1997, IS DENIED. 10. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED pursuant to Section 4(i) of the Communications Act, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  154(i) and Section 90.139 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  90.139, that the application to use frequencies in the 66-82 MHz range filed by Schlumberger Technology Corp. on February 27, 1997, IS DISMISSED. 11. This action is taken under delegated authority pursuant to Sections 0.131 and 0.331 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.   0.131, 0.331. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION D'wana R. Terry Chief, Public Safety and Private Wireless Division Wireless Telecommunication Bureau j:\thomson\schlumb2.ord 1-22-99 Redline with RM edits j:\thomson\schlumb4 1-25-99 with REM edits - to DT j:\thomson\schlumb5 HZ rewrite j:\thomson\schlumb6 et 2-16-99 to DT 2-17-99 w/HZ edits. to DT 2-17-99 w/DT final edits