Federal Communications Commission DA 14-933
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In re Matter of 
NUCOM
Petition for Reconsideration of Termination of 
Local Multipoint Distribution Service Licenses 
WPOH485, WPOH486, WPOH487, WPOH488, 
and WPOH489
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ORDER ON FURTHER RECONSIDERATION
Adopted:  June 26, 2014    Released:  June 27, 2014
By the Deputy Chief, Broadband Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau:
I. INTRODUCTION  
1. In this Order on Further Reconsideration, we deny a request filed by NUCOM seeking 
reconsideration of our action affirming the termination of NUCOM’s Local Multipoint Distribution 
Service (“LMDS”) licenses WPOH485 (Oneonta, NY), WPOH486 (Portsmouth, OH), WPOH487 (New 
Castle, PA), WPOH488 (Burlington, IA), and WPOH489 (Waycross, GA) (“Licenses”).  
II. BACKGROUND
2. On June 24, 1998, the Licenses were originally issued to NUCOM as a result of Auction 
No. 17.
1
  At the end of the initial ten-year license period, by June 24, 2008, NUCOM was required to 
submit an acceptable showing to the Commission demonstrating it was providing “substantial service” in 
each licensed area.
2
  Failure by any licensee to meet the substantial service requirement will result in 
forfeiture of the license and the licensee will be ineligible to regain it.
3
   
3. On October 10, 2007, NUCOM filed applications for extension of time to demonstrate 
substantial service for its LMDS licenses.
4
  On April 11, 2008, the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau 
(“Bureau”) granted the requests for extension of the construction deadlines filed by a large group of 
                                                          
1
See File No. 0000000022 (granted June 24, 1998); FCC Announces the Conditional Grant of 25 Local Multipoint 
Distribution Service Licenses, Public Notice, 13 FCC Rcd 17186 (WTB 1998).  
2
See 47 C.F.R. § 101.1011(a); see also Rulemaking to Amend Parts 1, 2, 21, and 25 of the Commission’s Rules to 
Redesignate the 27.5 GHz Frequency Band, to Reallocate the 29.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Band, to Establish Rules 
and Policies For Local Multipoint Distribution Service and For Fixed Satellite Services, CC Docket No. 92-297, 
Second Report and Order, Order on Reconsideration and Fifth Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 12 FCC Rcd 12545, 
12658 ¶¶ 261-262 (1997) (“LMDS Second Report and Order”).  
3
See 47 C.F.R. § 101.1011(a).
4
File Nos. 0003195288-0003195292 (filed Oct. 10, 2007).
Federal Communications Commission DA 14-933
2
LMDS licensees – including NUCOM –  to extend their deadlines to meet the substantial service 
requirements to June 1, 2012, resulting in a nearly four-year construction extension for each of these 
licensees.
5
4. On April 2, 2012, NUCOM filed applications pursuant to Section 1.946(e) of the 
Commission’s Rules seeking a further extension of time until June 7, 2013, to construct its five LMDS 
licenses.
6
  On May 14, 2012, NUCOM amended the 2012 Extension Applications to provide a copy of an 
equipment order.
7
  On May 23, 2012, NUCOM amended the 2012 Extension Applications to provide 
additional legal argument in support of its request for more time.
8
  On August 7, 2013, NUCOM amended 
the 2012 Extension Applications to request an extension until November 1, 2013.
9
  On August 15, 2013, 
the Bureau granted the 2012 Extension Applications, as amended, and extended the deadline for NUCOM 
to demonstrate substantial service to November 1, 2013.
10
5. NUCOM was required to file a notification of completion of construction for each of the 
Licenses by November 16, 2013, or fifteen days after the November 1, 2013 deadline.
11
  If NUCOM had 
wanted additional time to demonstrate substantial service, it was required to have filed a Form 601 
seeking an extension by November 1, 2013, the construction deadline.
12
  
6. When a licensee fails to file a notification that it has completed construction by an applicable 
buildout deadline, the license, location, or frequency is placed in “termination pending” status.  For a 
license, location, or frequency in that status, the Bureau presumes that the licensee did not meet buildout 
requirement.
13
  If the licensee does not file a petition for reconsideration within 30 days after public notice 
of the termination pending status demonstrating that it met that buildout requirement, the status of the 
license, location, or frequency is changed to “terminated” as of the buildout deadline.
14
  On December 11, 
2013, the Bureau sent NUCOM license auto-termination letters and the Licenses entered termination 
pending status.
15
  Accordingly, on the same day, the Bureau provided public notice of the pending license 
terminations.
16
                                                          
5
Applications filed by Licensees in the Local  Multipoint Distribution Service (LMDS) Seeking Waivers of Section 
101.1011 of the Commission’s Rules and Extensions of Time to Construct and Demonstrate Substantial Service, 
Memorandum Opinion and Order, 23 FCC Rcd 5894 (WTB 2008) (LMDS Order).
6
See File Nos. 0005145441-0005145445 (filed Apr. 2, 2012) (“2012 Extension Applications”).
7
2012 Extension Applications, NUCOM Equipment Order (filed May 14, 2012).
8
2012 Extension Applications, Supplement and Amendment to Request for Additional Time to Demonstrate
Substantial Service (filed May 23, 2012).
9
2012 Extension Applications, Amendment (filed Aug. 7, 2013).
10
2012 Extension Applications (granted Aug. 15, 2013).
11
See 47 C.F.R. § 1.946(d).
12
See 47 C.F.R. § 1.946(e).
13
SeeWireless Telecommunications Bureau Announces Deployment Of “Auto-Term,” the Automated Feature in its 
Universal Licensing System That Identifies Unconstructed Stations Resulting in Automatic Termination of Licenses, 
Public Notice, 21 FCC Rcd 163 (WTB 2006) (“Auto-Term Public Notice”).
14
Id.
15
Auto-Termination Letters, Ref. Nos. 5704551-5704555 (Dec. 11, 2013).
16
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Market Based Licenses Termination Pending, Report No. 9205, Public 
Notice (Dec. 11, 2013) at 1.
Federal Communications Commission DA 14-933
3
7. On December 26, 2013, NUCOM filed a petition for reconsideration.
17
  NUCOM 
reported, “NUCOM is in the process of completing its construction and coverage requirement and 
expect[s] completion before end of 2013.”
18
On January 16, 2014, the Broadband Division (“Division”) of
the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau denied the Petition.
19
  The Division wrote, “NUCOM has not 
met the November 1, 2013 substantial service deadline and it has not explained why it failed to either 
meet the substantial service deadline or timely request a further extension of the deadline.”
20
  It noted that 
once a license enters termination pending status, a petition for reconsideration may be granted only if the 
licensee met the relevant construction deadline.
21
  The Division also stated that NUCOM had failed to 
properly request an extension of the substantial service deadline.
22
  It finally noted that “the Licenses 
automatically terminated, by operation of Sections 1.946(c) and 1.955(a)(2) of the Commission’s Rules, 
on November 1, 2013.”
23
8. NUCOM filed another petition for reconsideration on January 30, 2014.
24
  NUCOM now 
claims that it filed a request for extension of time on October 4, 2013.
25
  It provides a letter addressed to 
the Commission’s Gettysburg facility and a certificate of mailing dated October 9, 2013.
26
  NUCOM 
notes it is a very small women-owned business and claims its members would be irreparably harmed if 
they are denied the opportunity to compete in the telecommunications field.
27
III. DISCUSSION
9.    We must deny the Further Petition.  While NUCOM now submits a letter dated October 
1, 2013 requesting an additional extension of time, the Commission’s rules required NUCOM to submit 
its extension request electronically using the Universal Licensing System.
28
  NUCOM’s previous 
extension requests were submitted via ULS.  It does not explain why it failed to comply with our rules in 
this instance.  The Division has no record of having received NUCOM’s October 1
st
letter.   Accordingly, 
we must conclude that NUCOM did not submit a valid extension request in a timely manner.
29
                                                          
17
Petition for Reconsideration (filed Dec. 26, 2013) (“Petition”).
18
Id.
19
NUCOM, Order on Reconsideration, 29 FCC Rcd 316 (WTB BD 2014).
20
Id. at 318 ¶ 9.
21
Id., citing Auto-Term Public Notice.
22
NUCOM, 29 FCC Rcd at 318 ¶ 9.
23
Id. at 318-319 ¶ 9.
24
Petition for Reconsideration, NUCOM (filed Jan. 30, 2014) (“Further Petition”).
25
See Further Petition.
26
See Letter from Mia Lovink, Nucom to Federal Communications Commission, Wireless Telecommunications 
Bureau (dated Oct. 1, 2013, submitted as attachment on Jan. 30, 2014) (“October 1 Letter”); United States Postal 
Service Certificate of Mailing (submitted Feb. 19, 2014).
27
See Further Petition.
28
See 47 C.F.R. § 1.913(b) (with certain exceptions not applicable here, “all applications and other filings using the 
application and notification forms listed in this section or associated schedules must be filed electronically in 
accordance with the electronic filing instructions provided by ULS.”)
29
If NUCOM had submitted a valid extension request, we would have needed further information in order to make a 
decision on that request.  NUCOM had submitted an equipment order in May 2012.  In October 2013, however, 
(continued....)
Federal Communications Commission DA 14-933
4
10. While it is unfortunate for NUCOM’s partners that NUCOM has lost its licenses, the harm to 
the business interests of NUCOM’s partners is not a sufficient reason to justify reinstating the Licenses.  
NUCOM had over 15 years to construct facilities and provide service to the public.  The LMDS 
substantial service requirement serves the important public interest purpose of providing “a clear and 
expeditious accounting of spectrum use by licensees to ensure that service is being provided to the 
public.”
30
  We believe the public interest in ensuring spectrum is put to use outweighs the private business 
interests of NUCOM’s partners.
IV. ORDERING CLAUSES
11. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 405 of the Communications 
Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 405, and Section 1.106 of the Commission’s Rules, 47 
C.F.R. § 1.106, that the Petition for Reconsideration filed by NUCOM on January 30, 2014 IS DENIED.
12. This action is taken under delegated authority pursuant to Sections 0.131 and 0.331 of the 
Commission’s Rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.131, 0.331.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
John J. Schauble
Deputy Chief, Broadband Division
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau
                                                          
(...continued from previous page)
NUCOM claimed that equipment was still on back order.  See October 1 Letter.  It is not clear whether NUCOM 
was diligent in ensuring that equipment was available to it in a timely manner.
30
See Amendment of Part 101 of the Commission's Rules to Facilitate the Use of Microwave for Wireless Backhaul 
and Other Uses and to Provide Additional Flexibility to Broadcast Auxiliary Service and Operational Fixed 
Microwave Licensees, WT Docket No. 10-153, Second Report and Order, Second Further Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking, Second Notice of Inquiry, Order on Reconsideration, and Memorandum Opinion and Order, 27 FCC 
Rcd 9735, 9773-9774 ¶ 104 (2012).  See also FiberTower Spectrum Holdings, LLC, Order on Reconsideration, 29 
FCC Rcd 2493, 2503 ¶ 26 (2014), appeal pending.