Next Meeting. The next meeting will be Tuesday, July 13, 1999, 9:30 a.m., at the new KLSY/KIXI Studios in Bellevue.  Directions.

Minutes of June 8, 1999 Meeting

Steven Mayes, Vice Chairperson of WWCIC, called the meeting to order at 10:30 and made welcoming remarks, after which everyone introduced themselves.  In attendance were 35 representatives from WWCIC and 17 representatives from WCTC.

1. The following information was presented by Dennis Anderson, FCC, on behalf of the FCC International Bureau (IB) since their representative was unable to attend.

          - Overview of how applications are processed by FCC and IC.

        - Causes for delays/denials of frequency coordination requests and ways to decrease application problems.

        - Spectral efficiency above Line A and below Line B.

        - Refarming.

        -        Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about refarming.

Mr. Anderson's presentation elicited many questions. Some questions were answered and some will be referred to FCC HQ:

- Where in FCC rules, Part 90, does it say what type of license modification applications get referred to Canada for coordination? What is the definition of "minor" modification.

- If U.S. system is adding sites to simulcast system, using same footprint, will the modification need to be coordinated by IC? Chris Lafkas answered that the important factors to be considered are the same frequency and same location, not just the same footprint. Coordination by IC is required if there is a different location.

- Regarding channel sharing, is there contour protection? The answer was yes.

- Is coordination required for stations with ERP toward Canada of 5 watts or less? Chris Lafkas replied that if the applicant is seeking protection from system interference, they should seek coordination. He emphasized that IC will request international frequency coordination if interference is possible outside Line B.

- How does U.S. applicant obtain the COSER number?

- Can U.S. applicant obtain a copy of what FCC sends to IC for coordination? Chris Lafkas commented that IC requires an e-copy but supplemental information is faxed by FCC.

- Why does a system that has been on the air for 20 years but is moving farther south from Canada need coordination? Chris Lafkas replied that if the system is moved, IC coordination is required even if the system is moving farther away. He also emphasized that if all information is not provided, the application is treated as a new one so applicants should ensure that all supplemental information is provided.

2. Other FCC Items of Interest presented by Mr. Anderson. Most FCC documents and information can be found on FCC's web site: http:/www.fcc.gov. For additional information see links below.

- The current FCC Chairman has set new goals. Competition in the marketplace is being promoted. FCC is continuing to deregulate while protecting consumers, fostering innovation, and ensuring broad access to all Americans.

- Telelphone issues continue to be addressed including slamming, cramming, and truth in billing. FCC received 20,000 slamming complaints last year.

- Modifications to Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (WTB) licensing procedures:

-- Two pools of frequencies (public safety and industrial/business).

-- Auctionable frequencies (licensee receives compensation from subscribers).

-- Non-auctionable frequencies (internal communications, not subscriber based).

-- No more licensing by lottery.

-- Public safety radio services exempt from auctioning.

-- Licensing to change from site based to geographic area based.

-- Institution of"Band Manager" - mutually exclusive private radio licensee who sublicenses to specific group.

- FCC has put priority on shutting down pirate stations, about 200 nationwide. One local station is still operating although legal papers have been served.

- Another priority has been the cancellation of SMR licensees that warehouse (license station but do use the frequencies).

        - HQ move to Portals has created some problems.

        - Wireless Enhanced 911 implementation.

- Proposal to create low power FM service.

        - Y2K Compliance.

- Implementation of HDTV.

        - Universal licensing and electronic filing has been instituted by WTB.

- Universal Service to provide affordable telecommunications to all; U.S. Government funding to provide internet access in public schools and libraries.

        - Tower registration rules have been enforced.

- Effective October 1999, the Compliance and Information Bureau will change to Enforcement and Public Information Bureau.

******************************************************************************

3. After the lunch break, Bob Fedoruk of Industry Canada presented an update on the status of EComm in British Columbia. The trials of the system have started. Representation from EComm was not available as they are in the process of turning up more parts of the system. Bob indicated they will be working out bugs in the system as trials progress.

4. Neil Allwood of Industry Canada gave a District Office perspective on the international coordination process. (Attachment available in hard copy only.) There was further discussion about on-air testing to demonstrate absence of harmful interference of a proposed operation. IC has two types of testing: informal is between two affected operators and formal involves IC. Neil emphasized that if there is to be informal testing, contact the local FCC office. They will call IC and arrange for testing between the two parties. Do not call IC directly. Neil commented that informal testing is not the first choice; the request for reconsideration should be coordinated first. For additional information see links below.

5. Chris Lafkas from Industry Canada, Ottawa, presented a flow chart showing Canada's perspective on the issues relating to cross-border approvals and coordination of frequencies. (His presentation is available in hard copy only.)  For additional information see links below.

- Overview - IC receives 10,000 land mobile and 1,000 microwave proposals from U.S. each year while IC sends 6,000 to U.S. IC must deal with four agencies: NTIA, FCC, FAA, and JCS. The system is called USCOORD. Files are downloaded and screened for mandatory data fields. If mandatory fields are missing, it is automatically returned. It is also denied if there is a potential for interference. The technical officer makes an input and it is returned to FCC. District Offices have access to the coordination records. To achieve successful results, be sure and provide all supplemental or technical information and indicate if there has been informal cross-border coordination or testing, especially with requests for reconsideration.

- Decrease Problems With License Renewals - If parameters don't change, proposal should not be coming to IC. Do not request parameters you don't actually need; i.e., is the additional coverage or ERP that you are requesting really necessary or realistic?

- Delays and Denials - IC strives to do the best job and look for ways to approve the proposals but delays can occur depending on workload. IC has also gone through downsizing and currently has limited staff and limited overtime money. Current processing time for new proposals is 75-90 days. Reconsiderations have more priority. Requests for reconsideration and tests are sometimes denied if it will prove that interference will occur. Delays will also occur because of new equipment for narrowband. The bottom line is to make sure proposals are complete and accurate. FCC IB can provide mandatory elements.

- Chris also briefed on spectral efficiency above Line A and below Line B, and refarming. He ended the question and answer period by commenting that it was unfortunate WTB did not send a representative as many questions concern WTB issues rather than IB.

6. Bob Fedoruk fielded questions concerning the feasibility of physically locating a U.S. transmitter in Canada that would point to U.S. and transmission would only be received in U.S. He stated that it could be feasible, but only on a case-by-case basis, and only if there is no commercial operation involved. Letters and documentation would have to be submitted to IC and FCC for consideration.

7. Use of frequencies by Nextel near the border. This does not represent an overall change to coordination procedures. There are very stringent conditions of authorization attached. Nextel and Clearnet have a special coordination agreement that clearly stipulates that these companies must resolve all mitigating circumstances, including how interference will be handled, rights of each company, etc. If any original conditions change, the agreement would require reconsideration.

8. Canadian use of TV channels 60-69. There is presently no plan to split these channels off from broadcasting. IC will wait until DTV is in place before making a final decision.

9. Canadian and U.S. perspective on refarming below 512 MHz. IC will enforce refarming by requiring licensees to have new equipment designed to operate on channel bandwidths of 12.5 KHz or less. FCC will not require the replacement of existing systems but will require that equipment be type accepted certified to meet new standards. For additional information see links below.

10. Proposal of a U.S./Canada plan to allow increased sharing of channels. The IC representative stated that special arrangements can be made on a case-by-case basis and referred to discussion about the Nextel/Clearnet agreement.

11. North American 800 MHz public safety mutual aid channels. Jon Wiswell inquired as to the feasibility of Canada sharing these channels. Bob Fedoruk suggested that this concept be submitted formally as a WWCIC proposal to WCTC for IC analysis.

The meeting adjourned at 3:35.

Shirley Perry