Federal Communications Commission DA 10-1700
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of
SYOSSET FIRE DISTRICT, NEW YORK
Request For Waiver Pursuant to Section 337(c) of 
the Communications Act of 1934, as Amended
)
)
)
)
)
)
File No. 0003065700
ORDER
Adopted: September 7, 2010 Released: September 7, 2010
By the Chief, Policy Division, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau:
I. INTRODUCTION
1. The Syosset Fire District, New York (“Syosset,” or “the District”) filed an application to 
modify its public safety license, Station WPYJ816, by adding frequency 473.1375 MHz and deleting 
frequency 473.2000 MHz.1 Because the Commission’s rules allocates frequency 473.1375 MHz for 
commercial radio purposes, Syosset seeks a waiver of the Commission’s rules, pursuant to Section 337(c) 
of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the Act),2 to use the frequency for public safety 
communications.3 For the reasons stated herein, we grant Syosset’s waiver request.
II. BACKGROUND
2. The Commission’s Wireless Telecommunications Bureau previously granted Syosset 
waivers of the Commission’s rules, pursuant to Section 337(c) of the Act, which authorized Syosset to 
operate Station WPYJ816 on non-public safety frequencies, including a non-standard “offset” frequency, 
473.2000 MHz.4  When Syosset filed the instant application it stated that it “is aware that Westchester 
County (Westchester), New York, has submitted an application to the FCC, file number 0003004004, to 
utilize frequency . . . 473.2000 MHz as part of its new ‘T-Band’ system.”5 Syosset opined that 
  
1 See File No. 0003065700 (filed June 11, 2007, amended June 19, 2007, November 25, 2008, and December 2, 
2008, and June 2, 2010) and attached “Description of the Application and Request for Waiver” (Waiver Request), 
“Description of Amendment” (Description), and “Supplement to Request for Waiver” (Supplement). As of the 
latest amendment, Syosset has deleted other modifications previously requested on the application.  Syosset 
observes that frequency 473.2000 MHz “is now used by Westchester County.”  See Description at 1.
2 47 U.S.C. § 337(c).  
3 See generally Description and Supplement.
4 See Syosset Fire District, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 18 FCC Rcd 16635 (WTB PSPWD 2003) (2003 
Order) (granting authority to operate on several non-public safety frequencies in the 470-512 MHz band) and 
Syosset Fire District, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 21 FCC Rcd 585 (WTB PSCID 2006) (2006 Order) 
(granting authority to operate on 473.2000 MHz).  Frequency 473.2000 MHz is considered an “offset” frequency 
because it is not specifically designated as a channel in Section 22.651 of the rules, but rather is offset by 12.5 kHz 
from designated channels 473.1875 MHz and 473.2125 MHz.  See 47 C.F.R. § 22.651.
5 See Waiver Request at 1; see also File No. 0003004004, filed on April 24, 2007.  “T-Band” refers to the 470-512 
MHz band.
Federal Communications Commission DA 10-1700
2
“[a]lthough the Syosset operations and the Westchester operations might be able to co-exist, Syosset 
would prefer to move to different mobile channels.”6 The Commission’s Public Safety and Homeland 
Security Bureau (the Bureau) based a subsequent grant of a waiver to provide Westchester the authority to 
operate on frequency 473.2000 MHz in part on its finding that “Syosset Fire District has a pending 
application and waiver request seeking, inter alia, to delete frequency 473.2000 MHz from its license so 
that Westchester may use the frequency.”7
3. Syosset seeks to add frequency 473.1375 MHz to “create a natural three megahertz 
pairing with Syosset’s repeater on 470.1375 MHz.”8 However, because the Commission’s rules allocate 
frequency 473.1375 MHz for commercial mobile radio service,9 this frequency is not generally available 
for public safety use.  Syosset, therefore, seeks waiver of Sections 22.651 and 20.9(a)(6) of the rules to 
use 473.1375 MHz for public safety communications purposes.10 In support of its application, Syosset 
provides a frequency coordination letter from the Forestry Conservation Communications Association, an 
FCC-certified public safety frequency coordinator.11
4. On April 9, 2009, the Bureau placed the waiver request and associated application on 
public notice.12  To assist in its analysis of the waiver request under Section 337(c) of the Act, the Bureau
sought comment on whether frequencies in the 700 MHz public safety band would provide Syosset a 
viable alternative to frequency 473.1375 MHz, particularly in light of the then-approaching June 12, 2009 
digital television transition date, and the Commission’s actions in facilitating a nationwide, interoperable 
public safety network.13 Only Motorola, Inc. (Motorola) filed comments, which were in support of the 
waiver.14
III. DISCUSSION
5. Section 337(c) of the Act provides that, in connection with an application by an “entity 
seeking to provide public safety service,” the Commission “shall waive any requirement of this Act or its
regulations implementing this Act (other than its regulations regarding harmful interference) to the extent 
necessary to permit the use of unassigned frequencies for the provision of public safety services …” if the 
Commission finds that:
  
6 See Waiver Request at 1.
7 See County of Westchester, New York, Order, 22 FCC Rcd 19872, 19875 ¶ 9 & n.28 (PSHSB PD 2007).
8 See Waiver Request at 2.
9 See 47 C.F.R. § 22.651.  See also 47 C.F.R. § 20.9(a)(6) (which provides that the Commission regulates Part 22 
frequencies as commercial mobile radio service frequencies).
10 See Supplement at 1 and Waiver Request at 2.
11 See File No. 0003065700, attached Letter from James A. Lundsted, National Frequency Coordinator Forestry 
Conservation Communications Association, to Mr. Tracy Simmons, Federal Communications Commission (dated 
June 19, 2007).
12 See Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau Seeks Comment on a Request for Waiver Filed by Syosset Fire 
District, New York to Modify Its Public Safety Station WPYJ816 Using a Part 22 Trunked Mobile Frequency, 
Public Notice, 22 FCC Rcd 21588 (PSHSB 2008) (Public Notice).
13 See id. at 2.  
14 See Comments of Motorola, Inc, filed April 30, 2009 (Motorola Comments).
Federal Communications Commission DA 10-1700
3
· “no other spectrum allocated to public safety services is immediately available to 
satisfy the requested public safety service use;”
· “the requested use is technically feasible without causing harmful interference to 
other spectrum users entitled to protection from such interference under the 
Commission’s regulations;”
· “the use of the unassigned frequency for the provision of public safety services is 
consistent with other allocations for the provision of such services in the geographic 
area for which the application is made;”
· “the unassigned frequency was allocated for its present use not less than 2 years prior 
to the date on which the application is granted; and”
· “granting such application is consistent with the public interest.”15
We note that an applicant’s failure to meet any one of the five criteria constitutes sufficient cause for the 
Commission to deny a request for waiver under Section 337(c).16
6. When considering requests under Section 337, we must first find that the applicant is an 
“entity seeking to provide public safety services.”17 Our analysis here is aided in part by the Wireless 
Telecommunications Bureau’s former Public Safety and Critical Infrastructure Division’s previous 
finding that Syosset is an entity that provides public safety services.18 We find nothing in the record since 
that time to disturb that determination.
7. Based on our review of the record, we find that Syosset has not demonstrated that “no 
other spectrum allocated to public safety services is immediately available to satisfy the requested public 
safety service use,” pursuant to subsection 337(c)(1)(A).19 Syosset asserts that “the Commission may 
conclude, based on Syosset’s previous waiver requests and the FCC’s own past decisions that … there is 
no other spectrum available to meet Syosset’s public safety requirements.”20 However the Wireless 
Telecommunications Bureau made the decisions cited by Syosset at a time when the 700 MHz band was 
not as developed as it is today.  While it may have been reasonable for Syosset to exclude the availability 
  
15 47 U.S.C. § 337(c).
16 See South Bay Regional Public Communications Authority, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 13 FCC Rcd 
23781, 23796 ¶ 33 (1998); Township of Cinnaminson, New Jersey, Order, 22 FCC Rcd 4583, 4585 ¶ 6 (2007) 
(Cinnaminson), citing University of Southern California, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 16 FCC Rcd 2978, 
2984 ¶ 15 (2001).  See also Implementation of Sections 309(j) and 337 of the Communications Act of 1934 as 
amended, Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, WT Docket No. 99-87, 15 FCC Rcd 
22709, 22768-69 ¶ 131 (2000) (footnotes omitted).
17 Section 337(f) of the Act defines the term “public safety services” as “services- (A) the sole or principal purpose 
of which is to protect the safety of life, health, or property; (B) that are provided–– (i) by State or local government 
entities; or (ii) by non-government organizations that are authorized by a governmental entity whose primary 
mission is the provision of such services; and (C) that are not made commercially available to the public by the 
provider.”  47 U.S.C. § 337(f).
18 See 2006 Order, 21 FCC Rcd at 588-9 ¶ 7.
19 47 U.S.C. § 337(c)(1)(A).
20 See Waiver Request at 2, citing 2003 Order and 2006 Order.
Federal Communications Commission DA 10-1700
4
of the 700 MHz band from its initial analysis, we must consider its application in light of recent 
developments.  Since Syosset first filed its application in 2007, the status of the 700 MHz band has 
changed significantly.  Specifically, the date by which broadcasters must vacate the 700 MHz band has 
passed,21 and the Bureau has approved the 700 MHz Regional Plan for Region 8 (New York Metropolitan 
Area, which includes Syosset).22 Therefore, we find that there are 700 MHz public safety channels 
immediately available and ready for assignment.23 Since Syosset has not amended its pleadings to 
address these developments, it has not shown the unavailability of 700 MHz public safety frequencies and 
therefore does not satisfy Subsection 337(c)(1)(A) of the Act.  Because Syosset has failed to satisfy one of 
the five criteria; specifically, that “no other spectrum allocated to public safety services is immediately 
available to satisfy the requested public safety service use,” it cannot obtain waiver relief pursuant to 
Section 337 of the Act and we need not address its arguments regarding the remaining four criteria.24
8. However, Commission precedent makes clear that our finding that Syosset does not 
warrant waiver relief pursuant to Section 337 of the Act does not foreclose consideration of the its request 
for waiver relief pursuant to Section 1.925 of the Commission’s rules.25 Rather, the Bureau’s ability to 
undertake a waiver analysis pursuant to that section rests on the Commission’s plenary authority under 
the Act to make rules and regulations necessary to achieve the Commission’s over-arching statutory 
purposes, including “promoting safety of life and property through the use of radio communication.”26  
From our review of the record in this case, we find that, despite its failure to meet the first criterion for 
  
21 In the DTV Delay Act that was enacted on February 11, 2009, Congress extended the date for the completion of 
the nationwide DTV transition from February 17, 2009, to June 12, 2009.  See DTV Delay Act, Pub. L. No.111-4, 
123 Stat. 112 (2009).  Accordingly, subject to the DTV Delay Act, the Commission extended the analog license 
terms and adjusted the construction permits for the full power television stations on February 13, 2009.  See 
Implementation of the DTV Delay Act, MB Docket No. 09-17, Report and Order and Sua Sponte Order on 
Reconsideration, 24 FCC Rcd 1607 (2009).
22 See Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau Approves Region 8 (New York Metropolitan Area) 700 MHz 
Regional Plan, PS Docket No. 06-229, WT Docket No. 02-378, 24 FCC Rcd 5317 (PSHSB 2009).
23 See, e.g., County of Los Angeles, California, Order, 23 FCC Rcd 18389, 18398 ¶ 19 (PSHSB 2008).
24 See, e.g., Hennepin County, Order, 14 FCC Rcd 19418 (WTB 1999) (having noted failure of Hennepin County to 
meet one of the criteria, Bureau did not address remainder); New Hampshire Department of Transportation 
(NHDOT), Memorandum Opinion and Order, 14 FCC Rcd 19438, 19442 (WTB 1999) (New Hampshire DOT) 
(after having determined that New Hampshire failed to demonstrate that no other spectrum allocated to public safety 
service was immediately available, Bureau noted that it “need not address whether NHDOT has submitted evidence
that would allow us to make the other findings required by Section 337(c)(1) of the Act.”). 
25 Balanced Budget Act Report and Order at 22769 ¶ 132 n.366, citing 47 C.F.R. § 1.925.  See also Letter to Alan S. 
Tilles, Esq., 22 FCC Rcd 13577, 13581 & fn.30 (2007) (noting that “[i]n addition to the Section 337 process, [public 
safety] entities can also seek a conventional waiver under Section 1.925 of rules.”).
26 County of Granite, Montana, Order, 24 FCC Rcd 5704, 5712 ¶17 (2009) citing 47 U.S.C. § 151.  However, 
consideration of a Section 1.925 waiver request does not predetermine that we will grant relief.  See, e.g., State of 
Tennessee Department of Transportation, Order on Reconsideration, 15 FCC Rcd 24645, 24650 ¶12 (WTB 2000) 
(Tennessee DOT) (finding that applicant had not met its burden of showing that Section 1.925 waiver relief is 
justified); New Hampshire DOT, 14 FCC Rcd at 19442-43 ¶¶ 10-11 (making similar findings).  Generally, we have 
not proceeded to consider whether waiver relief is warranted under Section 1.925 when public safety entities have 
submitted vague and insufficiently specific information.  See Cinnaminson, 22 FCC Rcd at 4585-86 ¶ 7 (applicant 
did not make any assertions specific to the requested frequency pair); City of Richmond, Virginia, Order, 21 FCC 
Rcd 14384, 14390 ¶ 15 (2006) (granting limited waiver relief under Section 337 but further finding that the 
applicant did not provide sufficient information about all of its proposed sites or implementation schedule to 
evaluate its request concerning the entire economic area).
Federal Communications Commission DA 10-1700
5
receiving Section 337 waiver relief, Syosset has provided us with sufficient information for us to consider 
whether waiver relief is justified under Section 1.925 of the rules.  Although Syosset did not seek waiver 
relief pursuant to Section 1.925, we find it in the public interest to consider its request pursuant to Section 
1.925 on our own motion.
9. To obtain a waiver of the Commission’s rules, a petitioner must demonstrate either that:  
(i) the underlying purpose of the rule(s) would not be served or would be frustrated by application to the 
present case, and that a grant of the waiver would be in the public interest;27 or (ii) in view of unique or 
unusual factual circumstances of the instant case, application of the rule(s) would be inequitable, unduly 
burdensome, or contrary to the public interest, or the applicant has no reasonable alternative.28  An 
applicant seeking a waiver faces a high hurdle and must plead with particularity the facts and 
circumstances that warrant a waiver.29  Based on the information before us, we conclude that a grant of 
the Waiver Request is warranted under the first prong of the waiver standard.  We proceed with analyses 
of each rule for which Syosset requests waiver.
10. Section 22.651.  The underlying purpose of Section 22.651 is to reserve certain 
frequencies—including frequency 473.1375 MHz—“for assignment to transmitters providing trunked 
public mobile service” in certain urbanized areas.30 A search of our licensing records reveals no Part 22 
common carrier operations (or public safety entities operating pursuant to waiver) licensed on frequency 
473.1375 MHz, or on adjacent frequencies in the New York metropolitan area.31 Previously, the 
Commission authorized Pagex Company to operate on frequency 473.1375 MHz under call sign 
KNKB898, Congers, New York, but this authorization terminated on March 9, 2005.32 No Part 22 
common carrier entities had applied for frequency 473.1375 MHz in the New York metropolitan area 
during the more than two years between the termination of Station KNKB898 and Syosset’s filing on 
June 11, 2007.  Further, no Part 22 common carrier entities filed comments to the Public Notice.  Due to 
the significant passage of time without any common carrier interest in the subject frequency, and because 
Syosset would not cause harmful interference to any incumbent entity, including Part 22 entities, we 
conclude that the underlying purpose of Section 22.651 would not be served by its application to the 
present case.
11. Protection of Co-Channel and Adjacent Channel Licensees.  While the Commission’s 
Part 22 rules do not require a showing of interference protection for incumbent public safety licensees 
operating on Part 22 spectrum by waiver, we have the discretion to apply land mobile interference 
protection criteria.33 We exercise this discretion to fulfill our due diligence to examine whether Syosset 
would cause harmful interference to these public safety entities or any other entities.  We now analyze the 
  
27 47 C.F.R. § 1.925(b)(3)(i).
28 47 C.F.R. § 1.925(b)(3)(ii).
29 WAIT Radio v. FCC, 413 F.2d 1153, 1157 (D.C. Cir. 1969) (WAIT Radio), aff’d, 459 F.2d 1203 (1973), cert. 
denied, 409 U.S. 1027 (1972) (citing Rio Grande Family Radio Fellowship, Inc. v. FCC, 406 F.2d 664 (D.C. Cir. 
1968)); Birach Broad. Corp., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 18 FCC Rcd 1414, 1415 (2003).
30 47 C.F.R. § 22.651.
31 The New York-Northeastern New Jersey metropolitan urbanized area is defined as an 80 kilometer circle around 
the center coordinates listed in Section 22.657(a).  See 47 C.F.R. § 22.657(a).  Syosset is located in this urbanized 
area.
32 See license for Station KNKB898.
33 See, e.g., Baldwin Fire District, New York, Order, 24 FCC Rcd 11857, 11868 ¶ 28 (PSHSB PD 2009).
Federal Communications Commission DA 10-1700
6
impact of Syosset’s proposed operation on co-channel and adjacent channel entities.  Section 90.313(c) 
provides that a “frequency pair may be reassigned at distances 64 km … or more from the location of 
base stations authorized on that pair …”34 We have verified that there are no licensed co-channel 
facilities within 64 kilometers of Syosset’s proposed base stations.35 Therefore, the application satisfies 
the co-channel separation requirements of Section 90.313(c).36
12. We also find that the Fire District’s proposed operations will not cause harmful 
interference to adjacent channel entities.  Garden City Park Fire District, New York is currently pursuing 
an application for lower-adjacent frequency 473.1250 MHz using 11.25 kHz bandwidth.37 The City of 
Bayonne, New Jersey is currently pursuing an application for upper adjacent frequency 473.1500 MHz 
using 11.25 kHz bandwidth.38 There would be no overlap of spectrum, since both parties and Syosset 
would operate with 11.25 kHz bandwidth.39 Thus, we find that Syosset’s proposed operations would not 
cause harmful interference to either incumbent co-channel or adjacent channel entities.
13. Public Interest.  Our analysis under the first prong of the waiver standard also requires a 
finding that grant of the waiver would be in the public interest.40 Notwithstanding the availability of the 
700 MHz band, we find it in the public interest to allow Syosset to use frequency 473.1375 MHz because 
it would allow Syosset to use its existing UHF T-Band infrastructure for the new frequency. We agree 
with Motorola that a grant “will allow Syosset to continue providing essential public safety services and 
will not cause harmful interference to other spectrum users entitled to interference protection.”41 We also 
note that the public interest is also served by Syosset’s return of frequency 473.2000 MHz since that 
“would make it possible for Westchester and Syosset to operate with no chance of mutual interference.”42
14. Section 20.9(a)(6).  This rule presumes that paging frequencies will be treated as 
common carriage services and regulated as commercial mobile radio services.43 This regulatory structure 
obviously is not applicable to nor appropriate for frequencies used by public safety licensees.  Because we 
find that it is in the public interest to grant a waiver of Section 22.651 to Syosset to use frequency 
473.1375 MHz, we conclude that the underlying purpose of Section 20.9(a)(6) would not be served by its 
application to the present case, and that granting waiver of Section 20.9(a)(6) is consistent with the public 
interest for the same reasons described above.
  
34 47 C.F.R. § 90.313(c).
35 There are no facilities licensed to operate on frequency 473.1250 MHz within 100 kilometers of either base 
station.  On frequency 473.1250 MHz, the County of Somerset, New Jersey operates Stations WPPB311, 
WQBL360, and WQBL367.  The Fire District’s sites are no closer than 68 kilometers to any Somerset location.   
36 Id.
37 See File No. 0003074060 (filed June 18, 2007, amended July 2, 2007, Sept. 25, 2007, Oct. 26, 2007, Feb. 5, 2009, 
Apr. 2, 2009, Apr. 3, 2009, Sept. 10, 2009, and Oct. 5, 2009).
38 See File No. 0003808598 (filed Apr. 15, 2009, as amended June 12, 2009 and Aug. 18, 2009).
39 See File No. 0003065700, as amended June 2, 2010.  Syosset amended its application to reduce proposed 
bandwidth from 20 kHz to 11.25 kHz.  Id.
40 See 47 C.F.R. § 1.925(b)(3)(i).
41 Motorola Comments at 4.
42 Id.
43 See 47 C.F.R. § 20.9(a)(6).
Federal Communications Commission DA 10-1700
7
IV. CONCLUSION
15. Based on the record before us, we find that grant of Syosset’s waiver request, subject to 
the conditions herein, is warranted and consistent with the public interest.  Accordingly, we grant the 
waiver request.
V. ORDERING CLAUSES
16. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Sections 4(i) of the Communications Act 
of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), and Section 1.925 of the Commission’s rules, 47 C.F.R. § 
1.925, the request for waiver associated with the captioned application filed by the Syosset Fire District, 
New York, on June 11, 2007, as amended, IS GRANTED, and File No. 0003065700 SHALL BE 
PROCESSED consistent with this Order and the Commission’s rules.
17. This action is taken under delegated authority pursuant to Sections 0.191 and 0.392 of the 
Commission’s rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.191, 0.392.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Thomas J. Beers
Chief, Policy Division
Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau