Skip Navigation

Federal Communications Commission

English Display Options

Commission Document

Harris CapRock Communications Inc

Download Options

Released: October 18, 2012
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
October 18, 2012

DA 12-1673

Mr. Raul Magallanes
The Law Office of Raul Magallanes, PLLC
P.O. Box 1213
Friendswood, TX 77549
Call Sign: E060157
File No.: SES-MOD-20120509-00427
Dear Mr. Magallanes:
On May 9, 2012, Harris CapRock Communications, Inc. (Harris CapRock) filed the above-
captioned modification application to add Intellian V60 and V80 antennas to its earth station
license. We dismiss this application without prejudice to refiling.1
Section 25.112(a) of the Commission’s rules, requires the Commission to return, as unacceptable
for filing, any earth station application that is not substantially complete, contains internal
inconsistencies, or does not substantially comply with the Commission’s rules2. The application
is defective for the following reasons:
The values submitted in FCC Form 312 Schedule B (Schedule B) for antenna model Intellian
V60 are inconsistent. The EIRP densities entered in Item E49 in the Schedule B, for emission
designators 3M00G7W and 567KG7W, -22.30 dBW/4kHz, are inconsistent with the maximum
EIRP per carrier values of 44.29 dBW for the 3M00G7W and 37.22 dBW for the 567KG7W
emission designators. Our calculations indicate that EIRP density per carrier should be 15.5
dBW/4kHz and 15.71 dBW/4kHz respectively.
The values submitted in the Schedule B for antenna model V80 are also inconsistent. The EIRP
densities entered in Item E49 in the Schedule B, for emission designators 1M50G7W and
284KG7W, -20.13 dBW/4kHz, are inconsistent with the maximum EIRP per carrier values of
44.78 for the 1M50G7W and 37.80 for the 284KG7W emission designators. Our calculations
indicate that EIRP density per carrier should be 19.33 dBW/4kHz and 19.28 dBW/4kHz
respectively.
Furthermore, the above inconsistencies negate the off axis EIRP compliance certifications that
Harris CapRock provided in Exhibits C though D of your application. Given these
inconsistencies, we cannot accept this application for filing.


1
If Harris CapRock refiles an application in which the deficiencies identified in this letter have been
corrected but otherwise identical to the one dismissed, it need not pay an application fee. See 47 C.F.R. §
1.1111(d).
2 47 C.F.R. § 25.112(a)

Federal Communications Commission

DA 12-1673
Accordingly, pursuant to Section 25.112(a) of the Commission’s rules and Section 0.261 of the
Commission’s rules on delegations of authority,3 we dismiss the application of Harris CapRock
Communications.
Sincerely,
Paul E. Blais
Chief, Systems Analysis Branch
Satellite Division
International Bureau


3 47.C.F.R. § 25.112(a) and 47 C.F.R. § 0.261.
2

Note: We are currently transitioning our documents into web compatible formats for easier reading. We have done our best to supply this content to you in a presentable form, but there may be some formatting issues while we improve the technology. The original version of the document is available as a PDF, Word Document, or as plain text.

close
FCC

You are leaving the FCC website

You are about to leave the FCC website and visit a third-party, non-governmental website that the FCC does not maintain or control. The FCC does not endorse any product or service, and is not responsible for, nor can it guarantee the validity or timeliness of the content on the page you are about to visit. Additionally, the privacy policies of this third-party page may differ from those of the FCC.