Qualcomm Inc. has asked the Federal Communications Commission for the Miami pioneer’s preference personal communications services license the company was denied three years ago.
The request comes after the FCC’s Office of Engineering and Technology asked for comment from Qualcomm as to what action the OET should recommend to the commission in light of a federal appeals court in January overturning the rejection of Qualcomm’s application. The court ruled that the FCC was inconsistent in awarding licenses for innovative broad broadband PCS technologies.
Sprint Spectrum L.P.’s broadband license in Miami is what Qualcomm wants, but the company said it is willing to compromise with an alternative license.
“We asked for [Miami]. But Sprint has already built. PrimeCo (Personal Communications L.P.) has already built. We’re willing to compromise. The threshold is whether or not the FCC will grant a license. They want to carefully consider what the court said, and re-evaluate the preference request. It’s not fresh in everyone’s mind,” said Kevin Kelley, senior vice president of external affairs in Qualcomm’s Washington, D.C., office.
In a meeting the company had at the end of January with the OET, the General Counsel, the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau and GTE Mobilnet, which has officially opposed Qualcomm’s request, Qualcomm said it indicated it was willing to work with Sprint as well as consider other licenses such as available C-block basic trading area licenses.
“In particular, the Phoenix BTA is available, and Qualcomm would be willing to consider a substitution of the Phoenix and other BTAs for the Miami MTA if such a solution would help the commission avoid embarrassment,” wrote Qualcomm’s attorney in an ex parte letter to William Canton, FCC Secretary. The letter summarized the January meeting.
Qualcomm has not discussed the matter formally with Sprint, and the FCC has included both Sprint and PrimeCo as parties to the proceeding for the purpose of ex parte rules because the issue of remedy “raises the possibility of a conflict between the applications,” the commission said.
Qualcomm, the Code Division Multiple Access technology innovator, had initially requested that the FCC not open up the matter for public comment, saying further delay would compound unfair treatment and severely prejudice Qualcomm in the marketplace. Reply comments from interested parties are due March 20.
“This obviously makes it difficult for us because it delays the commission’s decision. We think that the court has already found that we were treated in an arbitrary and capricious way,” said Qualcomm’s attorney Veronica Ahern from Nixon, Hargrave, Devans & Doyle L.L.P.
Only GTE so far as formally objected to Qualcomm’s request, and it has not commented on its reasons for the objection. The company holds several rural service area licenses in southern Florida. GTE objected to Qualcomm’s application for the pioneer’s preference license in 1992 along with the applications of about 40 companies. It wrote, “Qualcomm’s application does not satisfy the commission’s requirement for a technical demonstration. As such, Qualcomm has not adequately demonstrated that it deserves a pioneer’s preference.”
Qualcomm would not comment on what plans it has for the license if it is granted one. The company has experience as an operator. It owns OmniTracs, a two-way mobile satellite communications and tracking system, and has participated as an operator on an equity basis, said Kelley.
