**Before the**

**FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION**

**Washington, DC 20554**

In the Matter of )

)

ITFS 2020 )

Emergency Petition for Postponement )

Of the July 3 - July 10, 2000 Filing )

Window for Two-Way Multipoint )

Distribution Service and Instructional )

Television Fixed Service Applications )

To the Chief, Mass Media Bureau:

**EMERGENCY PETITION**

Lynn R. Charytan

Daniel B. Phythyon

Josh L. Roland

WILMER, CUTLER & PICKERING

2445 M Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20037-1420

\(202\) 663-6000

Counsel for ITFS 2020, L.L.C.

June 6, 2000

**[SUMMARY]{.underline}**

ITFS 2020 requests that the FCC's Mass Media Bureau grant a postponement
of the first filing window for Multipoint Distribution Service ("MDS")
and Instructional Television Fixed Service ("ITFS") applications for
two-way operations. This short-term delay in the filing window is
necessary because the commercially available filing software that ITFS
(and MDS) licensees need to submit their two-way applications during the
first filing window is not yet perfected. The delay is necessary also to
ensure that two-way applicants are provided timely access to up-to-date
FCC licensing information \-- ideally in an electronic database format
\-- for use in preparing their two-way applications, so that any
applications ultimately filed contain accurate technical data concerning
interference to incumbent licensees' operations. Finally, the requested
delay will enable two-way applicants to obtain clarification from the
FCC staff of a number of procedural and technical issues essential to
the two-way application process. Without the requested delay, ITFS 2020
predicts that the vast majority of ITFS licensees will be unable to
complete applications for two-way operations in time for the filing
window, and the introduction of two-way services on a widespread basis
will be substantially delayed. As a result, many ITFS licensees will not
be able to gain the full benefits of the advanced two-way services and
technologies that the Commission has sought to make available to them to
further their educational mission. Indeed, many licensees, particularly
in the large markets, may be

permanently excluded from service to substantial sections of their
service areas if they are unable to file in the opening window.

**TABLE OF CONTENTS**

SUMMARY i

I. BACKGROUND 2

II\. IN ORDER TO MAXIMIZE THEIR ABILITY TO PROVIDE TWO-WAY

OPERATIONS, LICENSEES MUST FILE IN THE FIRST FILING

WINDOW 4

III\. COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE SOFTWARE IS NOT YET RELIABLE 7

IV\. POSTPONEMENT OF THE FIRST FILING WINDOW WOULD PROVIDE

ADDITIONAL TIME FOR THE FCC STAFF TO CONTINUE MAKING

NECESSARY IMPROVEMENTS TO THE ITFS/MDS DATABASE 9

V. THE COMMISSION SHOULD MAKE USE OF A TEMPORARY

POSTPONEMENT OF THE FILING WINDOW TO CLARIFY OUTSTANDING

PROCEDURAL ISSUES RELATING TO THE TWO-WAY APPLICATION

PROCESS 12

VI\. POSTPONEMENT OF THE FILING WINDOW FOR NINE MONTHS

IS IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST 13

VII\. CONCLUSION 15

**Before the**

**FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION**

**Washington, DC 20554**

In the Matter of )

)

ITFS 2020 )

Emergency Petition for Postponement )

Of the July 3 - July 10, 2000 Filing )

Window for Two-Way Multipoint )

Distribution Service and Instructional )

Television Fixed Service Applications )

To the Chief, Mass Media Bureau:

**EMERGENCY PETITION**

ITFS 2020,[^1] by its attorneys, respectfully submits this Emergency
Petition requesting that the Federal Communications Commission's ("FCC"
or "Commission") Mass Media Bureau ("Bureau") postpone the July 3
through July 10, 2000 filing window for Multipoint Distribution Service
("MDS") and Instructional Television Fixed Service ("ITFS") applications
for two-way operations.[^2] As set forth more fully below, the
nine-month postponement we request is necessary to allow ITFS licensees
to file applications that will permit two-way operations. Absent the
requested postponement, ITFS licensees either will submit applications
that turn out to be incomplete or inaccurate, and therefore unacceptable
for filing, or simply will be unable to complete their applications and
thus be forced to wait until subsequent filing windows to apply for
two-way authorization. To the extent that some licensees are able to
meet the initial window, all other nearby co-channel and adjacent
channel licensees stand to be severely handicapped. As a result, the
introduction of two-way services on a widespread basis will be
substantially delayed, and many ITFS licensees will not be able to gain
the full benefits of the advanced services and technologies necessary to
further their educational missions. These licensees -- and the public --
will suffer irreparable harm if this opportunity is lost.

**I. BACKGROUND**

In a Report and Order issued on September 25, 1998, the Commission
revised its rules to enable MDS and ITFS licensees to engage in fixed,
two-way transmissions.[^3] This action was taken in response to a
petition for rulemaking filed by a significant number of MDS and ITFS
licensees seeking to enhance the competitiveness of the wireless cable
industry and to extend the benefits of advanced, two-way communications
capabilities to the educational community. As the Commission recognized
in adopting these revised rules, this increased flexibility will
dramatically expand the universe of services and applications that ITFS
licensees may offer to include advanced video-conferencing, distance
learning, and expanded continuing education opportunities.[^4] In
addition, this increased flexibility will significantly increase the
value of ITFS spectrum to ITFS licensees for their own use and as an
asset to be leased to commercial carriers.[^5] One particularly useful
application could be the introduction of additional wireless local
competition over the ITFS and MDS spectrum. Regardless of whether they
intend to aggregate spectrum with other ITFS licensees, partner with
commercial providers, or use their spectrum solely to meet their
internal needs, all ITFS licensees can benefit from the ability to
provide two-way services.

Applicants submitting two-way applications will be required to certify
that they have met all requirements regarding interference protection to
existing and prior proposed facilities, and that they have served all
potentially affected parties with copies of their applications and with
detailed engineering analyses.[^6] Applications that are found by the
Commission staff to be incomplete or that lack the required
certifications will be dismissed with prejudice and the applicants will
lose their priority over subsequently filed applications.[^7] Where an
application is found by the staff to be grantable, it is very important
that all engineering calculations in fact be accurate: If at any time
after the grant of an application, unauthorized interference results to
a protected facility, the grantee-licensee will be required to cease
operations immediately. At that point, the burden will be on that
two-way licensee to prove that it is not the cause of such
interference.[^8]

On March 23, 2000, the Bureau announced that the first filing window for
MDS and ITFS two-way applications would open on July 3 and close on July
10, 2000. Both the Commission and the MDS/ITFS industry have an interest
in ensuring that the two-way licensing process begins as soon as
possible. Indeed, the ITFS community has urged the Commission since the
start of the two-way proceeding to expedite the availability of two-way
operations for educational purposes; many licensees accordingly
initially supported and even advocated the July filing deadline.
However, as explained in greater detail below and in the attached
declarations,[^9] it has become apparent over the past month or so that
licensees face certain short-term problems relating to the two-way
application process that make it extremely difficult, if not impossible,
for at least the great majority of ITFS licensees to prepare acceptable,
grantable applications in time for the first filing window. ITFS 2020
believes that many MDS licensees also are experiencing these problems
and would benefit from the requested delay. ITFS 2020 therefore
respectfully requests that the Bureau temporarily postpone the first
filing window to permit these problems to be solved.

**II. IN ORDER TO MAXIMIZE THEIR ABILITY TO PROVIDE TWO-WAY OPERATIONS,
LICENSEES MUST FILE IN THE FIRST FILING WINDOW.**

Although the FCC has indicated that it will open rolling filing windows
for two-way authorizations on a regular basis following the first filing
window, as discussed below, these future filing windows are not a
substitute for the initial filing opportunity. A significant factor in
determining whether a two-way application is grantable depends upon the
applicant's ability to demonstrate that proposed two-way operations will
not cause interference to existing or prior proposed operations. Thus,
the ability of an applicant filing for two-way authorization for a
specific market in subsequent filing windows to demonstrate that its
operations will not cause interference to other licensees decreases
significantly each time that a two-way application is granted for that
market, with corresponding reduction in the areas it can serve. This is
likely to be a particular problem in larger markets, where the greatest
number of stations is located and the greatest number of initial two-way
applications is anticipated. Further, those whose applications are
granted first in time will have little incentive to negotiate any middle
ground. By contrast, all applications filed during the initial filing
window will be considered filed on the same day; as the FCC recognized,
this gives applicants with conflicting proposals incentives to negotiate
mutually agreeable solutions.[^10] Once having missed the opportunity of
filing during the first filing window, the longer ITFS two-way
applicants must wait to file until after that first window has closed,
the less likely their chances of ever being able to provide two-way
operations throughout their entire licensed service area.

Participation in the initial filing window is especially vital for
licensees that must rely on \"limited exception" status.[^11] This
applies to all stations that now receive harmful interference within
their 35-mile-radius protected service areas ("PSAs"), as is the case
with many or most stations in those markets that have numerous licensed
stations, particularly the largest markets. The "limited exception"
permits Station A to propose two-way service that would cause
interference to areas within Station B's PSA to the extent that those
areas already suffer interference.[^12]

Reliance on this exception will be of critical importance to many
stations. The value of this exception will decline dramatically to the
extent that stations are unable to file in the first window, for the
following reason: The two-way applications of Station A and B, which now
interfere with each other, can be expected to involve mutual
interference. If both are filed in the initial filing window, those
stations will have parity of status and they will be in a position to
work out their differences on a mutually beneficial basis. If they do
not file in the first filing window, the race will be to the swift;
thus, if Station A files even a day later than Station B, Station A will
be required to provide full protection to Station B, and Station A's
service area accordingly will be severely limited. Thus, if a licensee
relying on the limited exception cannot successfully participate in the
initial two-way filing window \-- and the Commission grants the two-way
application of co-channel or adjacent channel stations \-- then that
licensee effectively may be confined to its present analog one-way
service contours for any subsequent two-way applications.  That means
that the licensee and the public it serves will be denied the full
benefits of innovative new digital technologies and the most
efficient network designs.  The FCC\'s procedures for this initial
two-way filing window must permit all limited exception licensees who
wish to do so to fully participate.  

In light of these basic engineering realities, public policy reasons
weigh in favor of scheduling the initial filing window so as to ensure
the greatest possible participation in the first filing window. The ITFS
community has worked hard to secure the option to provide two-way
services because of the advantages that such flexibility will afford.
These efforts will have been wasted if software and other avoidable
technical limitations prevent the vast majority of ITFS licensees from
gaining access to the advanced technologies necessary to further their
educational mission.

**III. COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE SOFTWARE IS NOT YET RELIABLE.**

As noted above, an application for two-way authorization requires that
an applicant certify that it has conducted extensive engineering
analyses demonstrating that its proposed two-way use will not cause
interference to any existing or prior proposed operations in the
applicant's market area.[^13] In the vast majority of markets, these
required engineering showings are very complex and time consuming and
cannot be conducted without the use of highly complex technical filing
software. To date, however, there is no perfected software commercially
available to ITFS and MDS licensees that is completely capable of
handling the interference analyses required in the two-way application
process.

As of the date of this petition, there are two providers of filing
software that may be used by ITFS licensees.[^14] The first software
package, offered by CelPlan, was officially released on April 15,
2000;[^15] the second, offered by EDX Engineering, was officially
released only on May 15, 2000.[^16] Significant flaws remain in each
that will make filing in time for the current initial filing window
virtually impossible.[^17] First, neither software program is yet
capable of incorporating data from any other application, whether filed
using the same or the other software package. As a result, the
evaluation of concurrently filed applications that is an essential part
of the two-way application process will be impossible.[^18] Second,
neither the CelPlan nor EDX software is yet capable of accepting data
from a diskette or CD-ROM, which prevents licensees from evaluating
potential interference from a proposed two-way system to an incumbent
licensee's system, or between proposed two-way systems.[^19] Finally,
neither the CelPlan nor EDX software is yet capable of addressing the
two-way interference rules' "limited exception" status discussed above
which is used to define the protected service area when station
partitioned service areas overlap.[^20] Significant training also is
necessary in order to use the software, which dramatically increases the
burden associated with filing a two-way application. For example,
CelPlan recommends up to 30 days of intensive training before it may be
used proficiently, and the EDX program also requires significant
training to operate.[^21] In total, ITFS 2020 estimates that, even when
the software packages are perfected, the preparation of an accurate,
complete two-way application could take between up to 1000 hours of
engineering effort to complete, depending on the number of incumbents
encountered.[^22] Further, each time that an updated version of the
software is made available, licensees who have begun to prepare
applications must rerun the information in the revised program.[^23]

Both software providers continue to provide updated filing software[^24]
and have assured ITFS 2020 that they are working to fix these problems
as quickly as possible. As a result, ITFS 2020 is confident that the
requested delay will result in perfected software that will allow the
application process to move forward. However, as detailed above, absent
the postponement requested, the current state of this software makes
timely filing impossible, except for MDS licensees that intend to
propose two-way systems of very limited capacity and sophistication.

**IV. POSTPONEMENT OF THE FIRST FILING WINDOW WOULD PROVIDE ADDITIONAL
TIME FOR THE FCC STAFF TO CONTINUE MAKING NECESSARY IMPROVEMENTS TO THE
ITFS/MDS DATABASE**

As discussed above, among other technical requirements, the Commission
requires that an applicant for a new or modified two-way system protect
all incumbent MDS and ITFS licensees from harmful interference from the
proposed two-way operations.[^25] As a result, access to current
information regarding the technical operations of incumbent and prior
proposed operations is fundamental to the two-way application process.
To date, however, ITFS licensees' preliminary efforts to prepare
applications using available FCC data demonstrate that obtaining
necessary technical information is too difficult within the short time
left before the first filing window opens. The application process also
has been complicated by the fact that although the FCC staff has
indicated that it will release an up-to-date and electronically
searchable database that contains all necessary licensing information in
advance of the first filing window, to date no such database has been
made available.[^26] While MMDS/ITFS data files have been available on
the Mass Media Bureau website, no file descriptions or database table
definitions have yet been provided. As a result, these data files have
been unusable. Very recently, the FCC has provided electronic access to
individual MMDS/ITFS license files. As yet, no engineering or technical
data can be obtained from such files.[^27]

Without an accurate, up-to-date, electronically searchable database,
ITFS and MDS licensees must instead obtain all information on
incumbents' stations from the files of the FCC's Public Reference Room
in Washington, DC. However, the need to review paper licensing records
for each incumbent licensee that might be subject to interference from
proposed operations makes completing the engineering analyses necessary
to prepare an application for two-way operations considerably time
consuming. In addition, significant restrictions on the availability of
these files have severely limited ITFS licensees' ability to determine
the presence of incumbents within a reasonable time and thus have
dramatically increased the burden associated with applying for two-way
authorization. For example, a member of the public currently is
permitted to review only three files per day, and the files are
accessible only four days per week.

ITFS 2020 recognizes that improvement in public access to the
Commission's ITFS/MDS licensing information is no easy task, especially
in light of the Commission's recent need to devote staff resources to
its own Y2K compliance efforts, and ITFS 2020 appreciates the ongoing
efforts of Commission staff to ensure that such information is as
accurate and up-to-date as possible. By temporarily postponing the
initial two-way filing window, the Commission can help to ensure that
the current limitations on the availability of accurate technical
information do not prevent ITFS licensees from filing accurate,
grantable two-way applications. First, a postponement would give the
Commission staff the time necessary to make the promised electronic
database available sufficiently in advance of the filing deadline to be
usable by two-way applicants. Second, once an electronic database is
made available, a delay would give applicants whom to date have relied
on paper files in the reference room the time needed to cross reference
the information in the files. Such cross checking is necessary not only
with respect to information concerning other licensees' operations, but
also with respect to data describing the applicant's own stations.[^28]
Third, if no electronic database can be made available well in advance
of the revised filing window, a postponement would ensure that ITFS
applicants have sufficient time, in light of the limitations on access
to information regarding incumbents' operation available in the
reference room, to obtain the technical information necessary to
complete their applications. Finally, waiting until a fully up-to-date
database is available before opening the first filing window will help
to eliminate any unfairness that might result to first round applicants
because of information that is added to the database only after their
applications have been filed. For example, ongoing changes to the
database after the filing deadline could easily result in a situation
where an application is petitioned and dismissed based on information
that becomes available in the database only after the application has
been filed. Worse still, such changes could result in unpredictable
interference after the license has been granted that forces the licensee
to cease all operations on that frequency.

**V. THE COMMISSION SHOULD MAKE USE OF A TEMPORARY POSTPONEMENT OF THE
FILING WINDOW TO CLARIFY OUTSTANDING PROCEDURAL ISSUES RELATING TO THE
TWO-WAY APPLICATION PROCESS.**

To date, engineers consulting with ITFS licensees have identified a
number of questions relating to the two-way application process that
require clarification before they can prepare acceptable applications in
time for the July 3 though 10 filing window. As ITFS 2020's engineers
noted in a May 24, 2000, meeting with Bureau staff, these questions
range from procedural issues relating to the mechanics of the
application process, to more technical concerns relating to the nature
of the engineering analyses that must be conducted for each incumbent
operator.[^29] ITFS 2020 appreciates that staff have addressed a number
of these issues, or have assured it that remaining issues will be
clarified in time for the first filing window. However, in light of the
current filing deadline and the complex nature of the engineering issues
involved, ITFS 2020 respectfully submits that it already may be too late
for clarification of these issues to be of any practical use to most
potential ITFS two-way applicants. Moreover, the vast majority of ITFS
licensees may not have the resources or personnel that affords them with
similar access to Commission staff necessary to resolve these
ambiguities, and must instead rely on the FCC's public notices and other
publicly-released information. They also may lack the resources
necessary to hire someone to complete their two-way applications for
them. Given the time constraints imposed by the July 3 through 10 filing
window, the laudable efforts by staff to informally assist individual
licensees simply cannot constitute sufficient clarification or notice of
these issues for the entire ITFS community.

Postponement of the July 3 through 10 filing window thus would provide
an opportunity for clarification of all outstanding issues relating to
the two-way application process. Among other things, a temporary
postponement will allow the Bureau to issue clarifying public notices
sufficiently in advance of the filing deadline so that ITFS licensees
will be able to successfully file accurate and grantable applications.
Postponement also would allow the Bureau to issue written responses to
"frequently asked questions" or hold a public forum to address these
issues, as is routinely done prior to the FCC's wireless and broadcast
auctions.[^30] Such efforts would help to ensure that *all* MDS and ITFS
licensees, and not simply those with the most extensive engineering
resources, would have a realistic chance of being able to participate in
the initial filing window for two-way operations.

**VI. POSTPONEMENT OF THE FILING WINDOW FOR NINE MONTHS IS IN THE PUBLIC
INTEREST.**

For the reasons outlined above, ITFS 2020 believes that the Bureau
should promptly issue a public notice postponing the first filing window
for nine months from the originally scheduled July 3, 2000 start date.
ITFS 2020 estimates that a postponement of this length is necessary as
follows: ITFS 2020 believes that it will require at least 30 days for
the filing software and the Commission's database to be perfected.[^31]
It will take approximately two months for applicants' engineers to be
trained on commercial software and become confident that this software
meets their application needs, and to verify that the information
available in the FCC's electronic database is the same as that contained
in the files in the public reference room. Assuming the database is
sufficiently up-to-date, it then will take approximately six months to
prepare and file applications. Based on its experience to date, ITFS
2020 estimates that by working diligently from the time usable software
is made available, this limited postponement will provide a realistic
chance for most licensees to complete two-way applications in time for
the first filing deadline.

Given the circumstances, a nine-month postponement is reasonable. A
shorter delay would not take into account the time required to prepare a
grantable two-way application (even with usable software) and thus would
be useless given the limited resources of many ITFS licensees. In
contrast, a longer postponement could unnecessarily delay the
long-awaited deployment of two-way services. Moreover, this temporary
delay is clearly in the public interest. It will ensure that all ITFS
licensees who are interested in providing two-way services are given a
true opportunity to file acceptable applications with the Commission. It
also will increase the likelihood that applications that are filed will
be found acceptable by the Commission and will contain the accurate
engineering analysis envisioned by the Commission when it adopted its
two-way rules. Indeed, no applicant is likely to be prejudiced by such a
postponement, as no one, regardless of resources, can confidently file
an application until the problems ITFS 2020 has identified are remedied.

**VII. CONCLUSION**

For all of the foregoing reasons, ITFS 2020 respectfully requests that
the Bureau grant this emergency petition for nine-month postponement of
the initial filing window for ITFS two-way applications, and announce
the postponement as soon as possible so that ITFS licensees may plan
accordingly. This temporary postponement will ensure that the ITFS
community is able to realize the full benefits that the Commission
envisioned in adopting rules to permit two-way operations on ITFS
spectrum.

Respectfully Submitted,

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Lynn R. Charytan

Daniel B. Phythyon

Josh L. Roland

WILMER, CUTLER & PICKERING

2445 M Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20037-1420

\(202\) 663-6000

Counsel for ITFS 2020, L.L.C.

June 6, 2000

**Insert Hidle Declaration, Duncan Declaration, May 24 handout.**

**[CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE]{.underline}**

I, John Meehan, do hereby certify that on the \_\_\_\_ day of June,
2000, I caused true and correct copies of the foregoing Emergency
Petition of ITFS 2020 to be served by hand\* or by first-class mail,
postage prepaid, upon the parties on the attached service list.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

John Meehan

[^1]: ITFS 2020 is a new company that was created to aggregate ITFS
    spectrum in order to maximize the educational benefits of two-way
    operations and to secure new opportunities for partnering with
    commercial carriers. ITFS 2020 also will help ITFS licensees in the
    preparation of applications for authorization for two-way
    operations.

[^2]: *See* *Public Notice*, DA 00-666, "Commission Announces Initial
    Filing Window for Two-Way Multipoint Distribution Service and
    Instructional Television Fixed Service" (rel. March 23, 2000)
    ("*Filing Window Public Notice*").

[^3]: *See Amendment of Parts 21 and 74 To Enable Multipoint
    Distribution Service and Instructional Television Fixed Service
    Licensees to Engage in Fixed Two-Way Transmissions*, Report and
    Order, 13 FCC Rcd 19112 (1998) ("*Two-Way Order*"); Report and Order
    on Reconsideration, 14 FCC Rcd 12764 (1999) ("*Two-Way
    Reconsideration Order*").

[^4]: *Two-Way Order*, 13 FCC Rcd at 19115-19115 ¶¶ 6-9.

[^5]: *Id*. at 19117 ¶ 10.

[^6]: *Id.* at 19148 ¶ 66.

[^7]: *Id*.

[^8]: *Id.* at 19148-19149 ¶ 69.

[^9]: *See* Declaration of John E. Hidle ("*Hidle Decl.*") (attached);
    Declaration of Philip D. Duncan ("*Duncan Decl.*") (attached).

[^10]: *Two-Way Order* at 19148 ¶ 65.

[^11]: *See Amendment of Parts 21, 43, 74, 78, and 94 of the
    Commission\'s Rules Governing Use of the Frequencies in the 2.1 and
    2.5 GHz Bands Affecting: Private Operational-Fixed Microwave
    Service, Multipoint Distribution Service, Multichannel Multipoint
    Distribution Service, Instructional Television Fixed Service, &
    Cable Television Relay Service,* Second Order on Reconsideration, 10
    FCC Rcd 7074, 7083 ¶¶ 24-25 (1995); *In the Matter of Request for
    Declaratory Ruling on the Use of Digital Modulation by Multipoint
    Distribution Service and Instructional Television Fixed Service
    Stations,* Declaratory Ruling and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 18839, 18853 ¶¶
    23-24 (1996) ("*Digital Modulation Order*").

[^12]: *See Digital Modulation Order* at 18853 ¶¶ 23-24.

[^13]: *Two-Way Order,* 13 FCC Rcd 19112, 19147-47 ¶ 62. The Commission
    also has suggested that it will rely on an applicant's certification
    as a "material representation." *Id*. at 19148-19149 ¶ 69. n.158. As
    a result, applicants who file applications despite the lack of
    reliable information may be subject to complaints that they have
    knowingly filed applications that contain misrepresentations.

[^14]: *See Hidle Decl.* ¶ 6; *Duncan Decl.* ¶ 3.

[^15]: *See Hidle Decl.* ¶ 6.

[^16]: *See id.*

[^17]: *See generally Hidle Decl.* ¶¶ 6-9; *Duncan Decl.* ¶ 3.

[^18]: *See Hidle Decl.* ¶ 7.

[^19]: *See id.*

[^20]: *See id.*

[^21]: *See id.* ¶ 6.

[^22]: *See id.* ¶ 8.

[^23]: *See id.*

[^24]: *See id.*

[^25]: Specifically, the interference analyses required by Form 331
    includes all co-channel and adjacent channel stations within 100
    miles of any system main station, booster station or response hub.

[^26]: *See Hidle Decl.* ¶ 10; *Duncan Decl.* ¶ 5. Furthermore,
    consulting engineers who have "jury rigged" access to currently
    available electronic licensing information found numerous instances
    where electronically available information is not current or
    complete as compared to information in the reference room files.
    ITFS 2020's representatives who recently compared electronically
    available information for seven BTAs in the top ten markets with
    information for the same BTAs in the FCC's reference room found a
    number of serious discrepancies. For example, some electronic
    licensing records lacked certain basic technical information
    (*e.g.*, description of antennas and authorized power levels; the
    number of links between modules) necessary to complete an accurate
    application for two-way operations where an interference analysis of
    the incumbent is required. Such examples were brought to the
    attention of FCC staff, and it appears that these files have been
    corrected. ITFS 2020 fears, however, that serious errors or
    omissions still may exist in many other parts of the database.

[^27]: *See Hidle Decl.* ¶ 10.

[^28]: The postponement also would permit ITFS licensees who do not
    intend to file for two-way authorization to verify that the files
    relating to their *own* licenses contained in the reference room or
    the database are accurate. This will ensure that licensees are able
    to demonstrate that their current operating parameters would be
    threatened by other licensees' proposed two-way operations.

[^29]: *See* "Discussions with Federal Communications Commission, Mass
    Media Bureau, May 24, 2000" (attached); *see also Hidle Decl.* ¶ 11.
    ITFS 2020 recognizes that parties seeking reconsideration, review,
    or clarification of Commission action generally must do so within 30
    days following the action's effective date. *See, e.g.*, 47 C.F.R.
    §§ 1.106, 1.115. However, as detailed above, the vast majority of
    these questions have come to light only as ITFS licensees have begun
    to prepare their applications. As a result, these concerns were not
    sufficiently evident, or even predictable, to be raised during the
    30 days following announcement of the filing window.

[^30]: *See, e.g.*, *Public Notice*, DA 99-1346, "Closed Broadcast
    Auction \-- Notice and Filing Requirements for Auction of AM, FM,
    TV, LPTV, and FM and TV Translator Construction Permits Scheduled
    for September 28, 1999; Minimum Opening Bids and Other Procedural
    Issues," 14 FCC Rcd 10632 (1999) at Appendix H (announcing August 3,
    1999 Auction Seminar).

[^31]: This approximation is based on recent conversations with the
    software providers and Commission staff; it is possible that it will
    take longer before either the software or database is ready for use.