*Pages 1--1 from  Microsoft Word - 47651.doc*
 Federal  Communications  Commission  FCC  04-  287 
 STATEMENT  OF  COMMISSIONER  JONATHAN  ADELSTEIN 
 APPROVING  IN  PART,  DISSENTING  IN  PART 
 In  the  Matter  of  Amendment  of  Part  22  of  the  Commission’s  Rules  To  Benefit  the  Consumers  of  Air-Ground  Telecommunications  Services;  Biennial  Regulatory  Review—  Amendment  of  Parts  1,  22,  and 
 90  of  the  Commission’s  Rules,  WT  Docket  No.  03-  103 
 Amendment  of  Parts  1  and  22  of  the  Commission's  Rules  To  Adopt  Competitive  Bidding  Rules  for  Commercial  and  General  Aviation  Air-  Ground  Radiotelephone  Service,  WT  Docket  No.  05-  42 


 Application  of  Verizon  Airfone  Inc.  for  Renewal  of  800  MHz  Air-  Ground  Radiotelephone  License,  Call  Sign  KNKG804,  File  No.  0001716212 
 Report  and  Order  and  Notice  of  Proposed  Rulemaking,  adopted  December  15,  2004. 
 The  prospect  of  high  speed  Internet  services  in  the  airplane  cabin  should  be  met  with  great  support.  As  we  jet  off  to  our  latest  destination,  we  all  have  an  interest  in  downloading  or  uploading  a 
 presentation  on  the  way  to  a  conference,  catching  up  on  personal  and  corporate  e-  mail  accounts  for  a  couple  of  hours,  or  maybe  even  doing  some  on-  line  shopping  for  a  child’s  upcoming  birthday. 


 It  seems  the  stuff  of  Buck  Rogers,  but  we  already  are  seeing  the  deployment  of  satellite-  based  high-  speed  Internet  services  on  international  long-  distance  routes.  And  with  today’s  decision,  we  take  an 
 important  step  towards  promoting  terrestrial-  based  broadband  services  for  domestic  air  travel.  We  configure  our  rules  to  allow  for  next-  generation  broadband  air-  ground  services.  Equally  as  significant,  we 
 rightly  conclude  that  these  broadband  services  can  be  provided  with  three  megahertz  of  spectrum,  and  that  it  is  technically  feasible  for  two  licensees  to  provide  broadband  air-  ground  service  with  overlapping  three 
 megahertz  licenses. 
 I  am  pleased  that  these  technical  decisions  have  allowed  us  to  move  away  from  only  making  available  a  single  four  megahertz  license  and  to  put  in  place  restrictions  that  ensure  that  one  licensee  does 
 not  control  all  of  the  800  MHz  air-  ground  spectrum.  Such  an  outcome  would  not  have  matched  up  with  technical  realities,  and  would  in  no  way  have  served  the  public  interest. 


 But  we  lost  a  golden  opportunity  here  to  guarantee  true  broadband  competition.  While  a  future  auction  likely  will  result  in  two  unique  licensees,  it  is  agreed  that  a  licensee  with  one  megahertz  of 
 spectrum  will  be  unable  to  compete  against  a  licensee  with  three  megahertz  for  a  true  broadband  service.  We  could  have  easily  made  a  change  to  the  item  to  ensure  that  the  broadband  air-  ground  market  would 
 have  been  served  by  two  competitors.  The  item  already  concludes  that  a  licensing  approach  with  two  overlapping  broadband  licenses  is  technically  feasible.  For  me,  the  benefits  of  competition  in  the 
 broadband  air-  ground  market  far  outweigh  any  minor  restrictions  that  possibly  would  arise  out  of  the  overlapping  license  option.  A  competitive  market  ensures  price  discipline  and  technical  innovation  that 
 simply  may  not  flow  from  a  single  provider  market. 
 The  Commission  has  historically  tried  to  ensure  a  minimum  of  two  similarly  situated  licensees  given  the  obvious  problems  with  sole  provider  situations.  I  disagree  with  the  decision  to  allow  a 
 single  air-  ground  broadband  license  and  dissent  from  that  portion  of  the  item. 
1