Federal Communications Commission DA 14-837
1
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of
City of Brownsville, Texas
Licensee of Public Safety Land Mobile Station 
Call Sign WQLR527
)
)
)
)
)
WT Docket No. 02-55
ORDER
Adopted:  June 18, 2014                   Released: June 18, 2014
By the Deputy Chief, Policy and Licensing Division Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau: 
I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
1. Under consideration is the June 17, 2014 Request to Amend Cost Estimate for Frequency 
Reconfiguration (Request) filed by the City of Brownsville, Texas (Brownsville).  Brownsville’s Public 
Safety Land Mobile Station, Call Sign WQLR527, is subject to relocation as part of the Commission’s 
800 MHz band reconfiguration initiative.
1
  Brownsville represents that it timely provided a cost estimate 
for the rebanding of its system to Sprint Corporation (Sprint) on May 12, 2014, but did not notify Sprint 
of Brownsville’s intent to upgrade its system until May 15, 2014.
2
II. DISCUSSION
2. In the Fifth Report and Order in this proceeding,
3
the Public Safety and Homeland Security 
Bureau stated that licensees proposing to upgrade their systems in lieu of rebanding them “should notify 
the TA [Transition Administrator] and Sprint, in writing, no later than the due date for submission of the 
licensee's cost estimate”
4
of their intent to do so.  Here, Brownsville did not provide the notification until 
three days after filing its cost estimate, but, as Brownsville notes, prior to receipt of a letter from Sprint 
finding the estimate sufficient to begin negotiations.
5
  Brownsville represents that it and Sprint “are 
                                                     
1
Improving Public Safety Communications in the 800 MHz Band, WT Docket No. 02-55, et al., Report and 
Order, Fifth Report and Order, Fourth Memorandum Opinion and Order, 19 FCC Rcd 14969 (2004); 
Supplemental Order and Order on Reconsideration, 19 FCC Rcd 25120 (2004), review denied sub nom. Mobile 
Relay Associates v. FCC, 457 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2006); Memorandum Opinion and Order, 20 FCC Rcd 16015 
(2005); Second Memorandum Opinion and Order, 22 FCC Rcd 10467 (2007).  See also Kay v. FCC, No. 06-1076 
(D.C. Cir. filed Feb. 24, 2006) (holding additional appeals in abeyance).
2
Request at 1.
3
Improving Public Safety Communications in the 800 MHz Band, Fifth Report and Order, 28 FCC Rcd 4085
(PSHSB 2013).
4
Id. at 4105.
5
Request at 1.
Federal Communications Commission DA 14-837
2
engaged in a process which included discussion of the City’s upgrade plans.”
6
  It does not anticipate that 
the negotiations with Sprint will exceed the 30 days allowed for negotiation and the 20 days allowed for 
mediation.
7
Brownsville submits that “grant of its request to amend [its cost estimate] will allow the 
parties to continue working on the upgrade proposal rather than the estimate originally filed.”
8
III. DECISION
3. As an initial matter, we regard the three-day delay in Brownsville’s notification of its intent 
to upgrade its system as de minimis and, for that reason, and on our own motion, waive the requirement 
that upgrade notifications be filed contemporaneously with cost estimates.  No party was prejudiced by 
the delay.  The relief requested by Brownsville, however – Commission permission to amend its May 12, 
2014 cost estimate – is not required.  It is common in rebanding negotiations for licensees to amend their 
cost estimates, often multiple times, in response to counteroffers made by Sprint, or for other reasons.  
Such timely, good-faith amendments do not require Commission approval.  
IV. ORDERING CLAUSES
4. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, sua sponte, that the requirement in the Fifth Report and 
Order
9
for the City of Brownsville, Texas to submit notification of intent to upgrade contemporaneously 
with the cost estimate for rebanding its system IS WAIVED.
5. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that the Request to Amend Cost Estimate for Frequency 
Reconfiguration, filed June 17, 2014 by the City of Brownsville, Texas IS DISMISSED AS MOOT.
6. 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 Licensing Division
Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau 
                                                     
6
Id.
7
Id.
8
Id. at 2.
9
Supra n.3.