Federal Communications Commission DA 14-744
1
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of
City of McAllen, Texas
Licensee of Station Call Sign WPSE816
)
)
)
)
WT Docket No. 02-55
ORDER
Adopted:  May 30, 2014                  Released: May 30, 2014
By the Deputy Chief, Policy and Licensing Division, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau:
I. INTRODUCTION
1. Under consideration is the May 21, 2014 Further Request for Extension of Time to Submit 
Cost Estimate for Frequency Reconfiguration (Request) filed by the City of McAllen, Texas (McAllen).  
McAllen seeks an extension of time until July 31, 2014 to submit a cost estimate for reconfiguration of its
800 MHz communications system.  Previously, McAllen was granted an extension of time, for the same 
purpose, until May 26, 2014.
1
  For the reasons set out below, the Request is denied.
II. BACKGROUND
2. McAllen represents that the replacement frequencies furnished McAllen by the 800 MHz 
Transition Administrator (TA) are incompatible with McAllen’s frequency combiner to the extent that 
some of the frequencies are spaced less than 250 kHz apart, the degree of spacing required if the 
combiner is not to introduce excessive attenuation into the transmitted signal.
2
McAllen claims that, to 
rectify this incompatibility, it will require either a new combiner “or a split of our existing combiner and 
installation of an additional antenna”
3
an alternative that McAllen claims will increase its costs over the 
lifetime of its system.
4
McAllen has requested coverage maps to verify that the insertion loss of a new 
combiner will not adversely affect the coverage of its system.  As yet another alternative, McAllen states 
that it is considering relocating its communications to an existing Regional Radio System.
5
  If this 
alternative is exercised, McAllen would have to replace its existing subscriber units with Project 25 
capable radios. McAllen claims it “simply needs more time to make the best of these three complicated 
choices . . .”
6
  Therefore, McAllen contends that it has justified an over two-month extension of time 
                                                     
1
Improving Public Safety Communications in the 800 MHz Band, WT Docket No. 02-55, Order, 29 FCC Rcd 
2163, Appendix A (PSHSB 2014).
2
Request at 1.
3
Id.
4
Id.
5
Id. at 2.
6
Id.
Federal Communications Commission DA 14-744
2
within which to submit a cost estimate to Sprint Corporation and the 800 MHz Transition Administrator.
III. DISCUSSION
3. We are not persuaded that the over two-month extension of time requested by McAllen is 
warranted.  The fact that it has requested coverage maps to ascertain the effects of loss in a new combiner 
indicates that it has selected such a combiner, and, presumably, is aware of its cost.  Similarly, the cost 
and specifications of a new antenna are readily available from manufacturers’ catalogs.  The cost of 
joining the Regional Radio System is ascertainable by making a telephone call.  The cost of new radios 
requires only a quote from a manufacturer.  In short, the tasks required for McAllen to derive a cost 
estimate, at worst, require a matter of weeks, not months.
IV. DECISION
4. Section 1.46(a) of the Commission’s rules states that “[i]t is the policy of the Commission
that extensions of time shall not be routinely granted.”
7
  The Bureau has emphasized that the “import of 
that rule is especially relevant to 800 MHz rebanding where delay in rebanding by one licensee can cause 
a ‘domino effect’ delay in the rebanding efforts of other licensees that have met the Commission’s 800 
MHz band reconfiguration deadlines with a consequent delay of the overall program. We therefore afford 
a high degree of scrutiny to the reasons licensees advance for extensions of time.”
8
  
5. Applying the appropriate degree of scrutiny here, we are denying McAllen’s second request 
for an extension of time and requiring McAllen to submit a cost estimate to Sprint and the TA on or 
before June 30, 2014.  In the event that there are extenuating circumstances that preclude McAllen from 
timely submitting a cost estimate, it shall file another request for extension of time in which it itemizes, 
using specific dates and descriptions, its efforts to comply, with diligence, with the instant Order.  
V. ORDERING CLAUSES
6. Accordingly IT IS ORDERED, that the Further Request for Extension of Time to Submit 
Cost Estimate for Frequency Reconfiguration, submitted May 21, 2014 by the City of McAllen, Texas, IS 
DENIED.
7. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that the City of McAllen, Texas shall file a cost estimate with 
Sprint Corporation and the 800 MHz Transition Administrator on or before June 30, 2014.
8. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, if the City of McAllen, Texas fails to file a cost estimate 
with Sprint Corporation and the 800 MHz Transition Administrator by June 30, 2014, it shall file a further 
request for extension of time within which to do so, in which the City of McAllen, Texas, sets forth its 
efforts to comply with the instant Order, being specific as to dates and descriptions of those efforts.
                                                     
7
47 C.F.R. § 1.46(a).
8
Regents of the University of California, WT Docket No. 02-55, Order, 28 FCC Rcd 15920, 15921 (PSHSB 
2013).
Federal Communications Commission DA 14-744
3
9. This action is taken under delegated authority pursuant to Sections 0.191(a) and 0.392 of the 
Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.191(a), 0.392.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Michael J. Wilhelm
Deputy Chief, Policy and Rules Division 
Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau