Skip Navigation

Federal Communications Commission

English Display Options

Commission Document

Miami-Dade County, Florida Request for Extension of Rebanding

Download Options

Released: July 23, 2014
image01-00.jpg612x792

Federal Communications Commission

DA 14-1045

Before the

Federal Communications Commission

Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of

)

)

Miami- Dade County, Florida

)

WT Docket No. 02-55

Licensee of Public Safety Stations

)

WPGD547 WPGD548 WPGD549 WPKI745

)

WPMP618 WQIR731 WQKZ227

)

ORDER

Adopted: July 23, 2014

Released:

July 23, 2014

By the Deputy Chief, Policy and Licensing Division, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau:

I.

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

1.

Under consideration is the July 11, 2014 Further Request for Waiver of the June 26, 2008

Deadline for Completion of 800 MHz Rebanding as it Applies to Miami-Dade County (Request) by

Miami, Dade County, Florida (Miami-Dade) for waiver of the June 26, 2008 completion date for

rebanding of its 800 MHz communications system, and the July 21, 2014 Partial Opposition to Further

Request for an Extension of Time to Complete 800 MHz Band Reconfiguration by Miami-Dade County

(Opposition) filed by Sprint Corporation (Sprint) on July 21, 2014.

2.

Miami-Dade seeks an extension of time until January 21, 2015 to complete the rebanding

of its system.1 It has encountered an unforeseen need to recall approximately 14,000 radios for

reprogramming of the radios’ firmware.2 Sprint “partially” opposes the Request because of asserted

“effects on Sprint’s own network and its customers,”3 and urges the Commission to direct that Miami-

Dade relinquish all of its pre-rebanding frequencies to Sprint by October, 2014.4 For the reasons set out

below, we hold the Request in abeyance pending receipt of additional information from Miami-Dade.

II.

DISCUSSION

3.

Sprint would have us propound a number of questions to Miami-Dade, e.g., why Miami-

Dade did not earlier address the technical problems with its radios when it discovered that the firmware in

the radios required updating; why Miami-Dade reverted to its pre-rebanding frequencies and why other

alternatives were not pursued.5 We decline to do so. We assume that Miami-Dade did not decide to

recall its radios on a whim and that Miami-Dade is just as anxious as Sprint to have the updated radios

returned to service.

4.

Sprint also requests that we order Miami-Dade to provide bi-weekly status reports to

Sprint and the Commission concerning the number of radios updated and the number remaining.6 We

1 Request at 1.

2 Id. at 2.

3 Opposition at 2.

4 Id.

5 Id.

6 Id.

image02-00.jpg612x792

Federal Communications Commission

DA 14-1045

will require Miami-Dade to file such reports by email to the Policy and Licensing Division of the Public

Safety and Homeland Security Bureau. Miami-Dade may copy Sprint on such emails.

5.

Sprint submits that we should require Miami-Dade to release its pre-rebanding

frequencies for Sprint’s use by the end of October 2014.7 This, Sprint claims, is appropriate because it

coincides with Miami-Dade’s “own projected schedule” for completing a first touch of its radios.8 We

decline to do so. Miami-Dade’s projection for completion of a first touch to its radios was made before

Miami-Dade encountered unforeseen problems with its radios which required updating the radios’

firmware. That said, however, we find that Miami-Dade has not justified its request that it be allowed

until January 21, 2015 to complete the firmware update. The time necessary to correct the radios’

firmware is a function of the resources applied to the task. Miami-Dade has not disclosed the number of

persons and technical resources assigned to the firmware updating or explained why additional persons

and technical resources cannot be devoted to the task so as to complete it before January 21, 2015.

Accordingly, we are directing Miami-Dade to report, within 5 days of the release of this Order, the

resources currently devoted to firmware updating and to explain why additional resources cannot be

applied to the task so as to ensure its completion before January 21, 2015.

III.

DECISION

6.

As Sprint notes, Miami-Dade’s rebanding obligation began in June, 2005 and it is the last

licensee, excepting those in border states, to return frequencies in the “old” NPSPAC band to Sprint.9

Much of Miami-Dade’s delay is attributable to its decision to replace, rather than reband, its 800 MHz

communications system. Thus, we impress on Miami-Dade the imperative of completing its firmware

reprogramming in the shortest feasible time, and are holding its waiver request in abeyance, pending

Miami-Dade’s submission of the information required of Miami-Dade herein.

IV.

ORDERING CLAUSE

7.

Accordingly IT IS ORDERED that the July 11, 2014 request by Miami, Dade County,

Florida for waiver of the June 26, 2008 completion date for rebanding of its 800 MHz communications

system IS HELD IN ABEYANCE pending receipt of the information required of Miami, Dade County,

Florida in the instant Order.

8.

This action is taken under delegated authority pursuant to Sections 0.191(a) and 0.392 of

the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.191(a), 0.392.

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

Michael J. Wilhelm

Deputy Chief

Policy and Licensing Division

Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau

7 Id. at 2-3.

8 Id. at 2.

9 Id. at 2 n.1.

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.