**Before the**

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, D.C. 20554**

+----------------------------------+---+------------------------------+
| In the Matter of                 | * | FCC File No. A059522         |
|                                  | * |                              |
| DENNIS ENYEART                   | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
| Conventional Business Station    | * |                              |
| WPRL897,                         |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
| Santa Inez, California           | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
+----------------------------------+---+------------------------------+

**ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION**

**Adopted:** March 9, 2001 **Released:** March 13, 2001

By the Chief, Public Safety and Private Wireless Division, Wireless
Telecommunications Bureau:

1\. *Introduction*. James A. Kay, Jr., (Kay) has filed a petition for
reconsideration[^1] of a decision by the Licensing and Technical
Analysis Branch of the Public Safety and Private Wireless Division
(Branch) granting the above-captioned application to Dennis Enyeart
(Enyeart). For the reasons stated below, we deny Kay's petition.

2\. *Background*. Kay is authorized to operate Trunked Specialized
Mobile Radio Station WNJA610 in the Northridge, California area on a
primary basis on frequency pair 810/855.8125 MHz.[^2] On November 13,
2000, the Branch authorized Enyeart to operate Station WPRL897 in the
Santa Inez, California area on frequency pair 810/855.8125 MHz at four
sites: three primary sites in Santa Inez and one secondary[^3] site in
Santa Barbara. The Santa Barbara facility is authorized to operate on
frequency 855.8125 MHz and subject to the condition that it not cause
interference to co-channel users in an adjacent communications area.

3\. On December 13, 2000, Kay requested reconsideration of the Branch's
action authorizing Station WPRL897. Kay alleges that Enyeart's Santa
Barbara site does not afford Kay's Oat Mountain primary site, authorized
under Call Sign WNJA910, the requisite seventy-mile co-channel
protection.[^4] Kay contends that Enyeart's Santa Barbara facility,
located sixty-three miles from Kay's Oat Mountain site, should not have
been coordinated and the application should not have been granted.[^5]
Therefore, Kay requests that we set aside the station grant and dismiss
Enyeart's underlying application.[^6]

4.  *Discussion*. Kay alleges that Enyeart's Santa Barbara facility does
    not afford Kay's Oat

Mountain primary site the requisite co-channel protection. Based on the
record before us, we disagree. Enyeart's Santa Barbara site was
authorized to operate on a secondary, non-interference basis in the 800
MHz band. Secondary sites may be forced to terminate operations should a
co-channel licensee locate a station within seventy miles of the
secondary site, and interference occurs as a result.[^7] It has been the
Commission's policy to license secondary facilities in the 800 MHz band
solely as an adjunct to primary facilities.[^8] Further, we reiterate
that secondary operations may not cause interference to primary
operations.

5.  There is no evidence in the record indicating that Enyeart has
    failed to meet the

condition imposed on the Santa Barbara facility. Nor is there any
allegation or objective documented evidence in Kay's petition that
Enyeart's secondary operations have caused interference to Kay's primary
operations or any other co-channel users in an adjacent communications
area. Accordingly, we deny Kay's reconsideration request. We nonetheless
remind Enyeart that the Santa Barbara facility may be forced to
terminate operations should it cause interference to co-channel users in
adjacent communications areas. Finally, we remind Enyeart that his
secondary operations are not protected from interference caused by
primary operations.

> 6\. *Conclusion*. For the reasons set forth above, we find no basis
> for reversing the Branch's

decision. The Branch's action is consistent with the facts presented and
Commission precedent. Therefore, we deny the petition.

7\. *Ordering Clauses*. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED pursuant to Sections
4(i) and 405 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§
154(i), 405, and Section 1.106 of the Commission\'s Rules, 47 C.F.R. §
1.106, that the petition for reconsideration submitted by James A. Kay,
Jr., on December 13, 2000 IS DENIED.

8.  This action is taken under delegated authority pursuant to Sections
    0.131 and 0.331 of

the Commission\'s Rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.131, 0.331.

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

D'wana R. Terry

Chief, Public Safety and Private Wireless Division

Wireless Telecommunications Bureau

[^1]: Petition for Reconsideration (filed Dec. 13, 2000) (Petition).

[^2]: *Id*. at 1.

[^3]: Secondary operations refer to operations that may not cause
    interference to operations authorized on a primary basis and are not
    protected from interference from those primary operations. *See* 47
    C.F.R. § 90.7.

[^4]: Petition at 1. *See* 47 C.F.R. § 90.621.

[^5]: Petition at 1.

[^6]: *Id*.

[^7]: *See* Roger Dickinson d/b/a Portable Walkie Talkies to Go,
    *Memorandum Opinion and Order*, 15 FCC Rcd 4845, 4850 ¶ 15 (2000)
    (Dickinson). *See also* Amendment of Parts 2 and 90 of the
    Commission's Rules to Provide for the Use of 200 Channels Outside
    the Designated Filing Areas in the 896-901 MHz and 935-940 MHz bands
    allotted to the Specialized Mobile Radio Pool, *Notice of Proposed
    Rulemaking*, PR Docket No. 89-553, 4 FCC Rcd 8673, 8674 ¶ 6 (1989).

[^8]: Dickinson, 15 FCC Rcd at 4850 ¶ 15.