In Re Application of CITY OF ST.
LOUIS (MO.), METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR
MICROWAVE FACILITIES IN THE
2500-2690 MHZ BAND
File No. 16068-PP-59X
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
21 F.C.C.2d 475 (1969)
November 25, 1969
[*475] The Commission by Commissioners Bartley,
Robert E. Lee, Cox, Johnson, H. Bex Lee and Wells, with Commissioners Johnson and H. Rex Lee dissenting and
issuing statements, granted the application by city of
DISSENTING STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER NICHOLAS JOHNSON
I join
in the dissenting statement of Commissioner H. Rex Lee.
I
recognize fully the needs of the St. Louis Police Department. I applaud its imaginative proposal. I deeply regret our inability to respond to
it intelligently.
But I
believe the Commission should deny the application of the St. Louis
Metropolitan Police Force for spectrum space in the 2500-2690 MHz band until
this Commission completes its review of the service being provided by the present
users of the space, the Instructional Television Fixed Service (ITFS) -- a
review which is now 3 years overdue. At
the least, I would impose a freeze on the acceptance of future applications in
this band.
I
cannot, however, agree with one statement in Commissioner Lee's statement. He says: "I recognize the critical
needs of the other users for additional spectrum space, but they can be better
accommodated in a different part of the band." Given the facts before us,
I cannot make such a determination. In
fact, given the past record of this Commission, and the facts which we have
concerning the spectrum in general, no spectrum management determinations can
be made in a proper manner. I have made
the point before: Without rational and consistent criteria for choosing between
spectrum users, without intelligent long-range planning, and without data on
the present spectrum utilization, it is impossible for this agency to properly
perform its role as the Nation's spectrum manager. See, e.g., In the Matter of Lehigh Cooperative Farmers, Inc., 10
F.C.C. 2d 315, 317, 11 P & F Radio Reg. 2d 1560, 1562 (1967).
I cannot
at this time decide that giving spectrum space to ITFS is of greater value to
this Nation than giving it to any of the many other [*476] users. Perhaps after the completion of the review
of ITFS service, I will be able to make a more informed decision.
I
dissent.
DISSENTING
STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER H. REX LEE
By
granting the application of the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Force for
operation in the Instructional Television Fixed Service band (2500-2690 MHz),
the Commission has dealt a totally unnecessary setback to the future
development of this new educational technology. The majority's decision may have moved a great distance toward
permanently damaging the maximum development of ITFS.
The
Commission's action is deplorable in that it approved this application without
acting on the overall problem of whether this hand shall be allocated for the
exclusive use of educational institutions.
The July 1963 "Report and Order" in docket No. 14744 (25 R.R.
1785) which created the ITFS service stated that after an initial period of 3
years, the Commission would review the use of the service by educators to
determine a future course of action. It
is now over 6 years, and the Commission has yet to undertake such a review.
There is
nothing in the rules governing these bands which prevents other services from
becoming licensees. However, this is
the first such application approved since the 1963 decision. I recognize the critical needs of the other
users for additional spectrum space, but they can be better accommodated in a
different part of the band. I also
realize some people in the Commission made an informal commitment to the St.
Louis Police Department. Nonetheless,
this agency should not have allowed this grant without imposing a freeze on
acceptance and consideration of all other non-ITFS applications for these
frequencies pending the institution and completion of the promised, but long
overdue, rulemaking dealing with the future use of the band.
Several
serious consequences result from today's decision. First, the Commission has suddenly opened a Pandora's box which
will lead to numerous applications from other services. Secondly, the widely aclaimed work of the
ITFS subcommittees in some 47 States and the
Since
1965, the Commission has wholeheartedly encouraged the growth of these
subcommittees on the assumption that the 2500-2690 MHz band would be allocated
exclusively for ITFS without sharing by other interests or services. The National Committee recently asked its
members to evaluate the current and future needs for ITFS services in their
geographic regions. Their comments
indicated a unanimous belief in the need for setting these frequencies aside
for educational purposes and a reexamination of the service at the end of a
10-year period.
[*477]
If such action is not taken, the educators may loss another media
resource, as they did in failing to obtain AM reservations. Then the Commission will have defaulted
again in not encouraging the full use of the instructional media.
Part of
the responsibility for this unfortunate situation must rest not only with the
Commission but also with educators.
Many educators, both on the local and Federal level, are still not aware
of the educational, social, and cost benefits which flow from the use of the
instructional technology. Many do not
understand how the technology may be used as a meaningful part of the learning
process with both the student and teacher participating, rather than as a mere
frill for classroom enrichment.
Consequently,
the majority of educators have not made their voices heard at the
Commission. Rarely does this agency
receive comments from State or local educational leaders (except, of course,
through their national educational organizations) in response to proposed
rulemakings or notices of inquiry in matters that should be of great importance
to them, such as CATV, computers, or domestic satellites.
In this
context, their rule awakening many times comes too late. When educators suddenly realize that their
school districts may have lost the possibility for fully implementing a medium
like ITFS, then they come knocking at the Commission's door.
I
recognize that the use of ITFS and other technologies is hampered by a lack of
school funds. The Educational
Television Facilities Act of 1962 did not contain any provisions for matching
grants for ITFS; nor did the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 specifically
mention funding for this technology.
However, title III of this act did set up a Commission on Instructional
Technology. It has now completed a
study of this field, and that Commission's report will perhaps soon be
released. Hopefully, it will recommend
the implementation of ITFS. If it does,
this may provide Congress with the needed impetus to release more funds for
this service.
While
the educational systems in this country are in a period of transition, this
Commission has a paramount obligation to preserve and protect those frequencies
which we know will be required to serve educational needs of present and future
generations.
It is
hoped that the Commission will remedy the consternation and confusion among the
ITFS committees and other educators by moving quickly toward instituting the
needed rulemaking and imposition of an interim freeze.