Skip Navigation

Federal Communications Commission

English Display Options

Commission Document

Brownsville Upgrade Order

Download Options

Released: June 18, 2014

Federal Communications Commission

DA 14-837

Before the

Federal Communications Commission

Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of



City of Brownsville, Texas


Licensee of Public Safety Land Mobile Station


WT Docket No. 02-55

Call Sign WQLR527



Adopted: June 18, 2014

Released: June 18, 2014

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




Under consideration is the June 17, 2014 Request to Amend Cost Estimate for Frequency

Reconfiguration (Request) filed by the City of Brownsville, Texas (Brownsville). Brownsville’s Public

Safety Land Mobile Station, Call Sign WQLR527, is subject to relocation as part of the Commission’s

800 MHz band reconfiguration initiative.1 Brownsville represents that it timely provided a cost estimate

for the rebanding of its system to Sprint Corporation (Sprint) on May 12, 2014, but did not notify Sprint

of Brownsville’s intent to upgrade its system until May 15, 2014.2




In the Fifth Report and Order in this proceeding,3 the Public Safety and Homeland Security

Bureau stated that licensees proposing to upgrade their systems in lieu of rebanding them “should notify

the TA [Transition Administrator] and Sprint, in writing, no later than the due date for submission of the

licensee's cost estimate”4 of their intent to do so. Here, Brownsville did not provide the notification until

three days after filing its cost estimate, but, as Brownsville notes, prior to receipt of a letter from Sprint

finding the estimate sufficient to begin negotiations.5 Brownsville represents that it and Sprint “are

1 Improving Public Safety Communications in the 800 MHz Band, WT Docket No. 02-55, et al., Report and

Order, Fifth Report and Order, Fourth Memorandum Opinion and Order, 19 FCC Rcd 14969 (2004);

Supplemental Order and Order on Reconsideration, 19 FCC Rcd 25120 (2004), review denied sub nom. Mobile

Relay Associates v. FCC, 457 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2006); Memorandum Opinion and Order, 20 FCC Rcd 16015

(2005); Second Memorandum Opinion and Order, 22 FCC Rcd 10467 (2007). See also Kay v. FCC, No. 06-1076

(D.C. Cir. filed Feb. 24, 2006) (holding additional appeals in abeyance).

2 Request at 1.

3 Improving Public Safety Communications in the 800 MHz Band, Fifth Report and Order, 28 FCC Rcd 4085

(PSHSB 2013).

4 Id. at 4105.

5 Request at 1.



Federal Communications Commission

DA 14-837

engaged in a process which included discussion of the City’s upgrade plans.”6 It does not anticipate that

the negotiations with Sprint will exceed the 30 days allowed for negotiation and the 20 days allowed for


Brownsville submits that “grant of its request to amend [its cost estimate] will allow the

parties to continue working on the upgrade proposal rather than the estimate originally filed.”8



As an initial matter, we regard the three-day delay in Brownsville’s notification of its intent

to upgrade its system as de minimis and, for that reason, and on our own motion, waive the requirement

that upgrade notifications be filed contemporaneously with cost estimates. No party was prejudiced by

the delay. The relief requested by Brownsville, however – Commission permission to amend its May 12,

2014 cost estimate – is not required. It is common in rebanding negotiations for licensees to amend their

cost estimates, often multiple times, in response to counteroffers made by Sprint, or for other reasons.

Such timely, good-faith amendments do not require Commission approval.



Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, sua sponte, that the requirement in the Fifth Report and

Order9 for the City of Brownsville, Texas to submit notification of intent to upgrade contemporaneously

with the cost estimate for rebanding its system IS WAIVED.


IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that the Request to Amend Cost Estimate for Frequency

Reconfiguration, filed June 17, 2014 by the City of Brownsville, Texas IS DISMISSED AS MOOT.


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.


Michael J. Wilhelm

Deputy Chief, Policy and Licensing Division

Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau

6 Id.

7 Id.

8 Id. at 2.

9 Supra n.3.


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.


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.