Archived—Clarification Questions for Wireless Personal Communications Services in the 2 GHz Range
The Department received 60 questions from eight interested parties for clarification of any aspect of the Policy and Call for Applications for Wireless Personal Communications Services in the 2 GHz Range which was released June 15, 1995. The questions and the Department's answeres are presented below, arranged by section of the document. The questions are in the language presented to the Department and have not been edited or altered.
- Clarification Questions for Wireless Personal Communications Services in the 2 GHz Range (PDF, 34 KB, 17 pages)
To access the Portable Document Format (PDF) version you must have a PDF reader installed. If you do not already have such a reader, there are numerous PDF readers available for free download or for purchase on the Internet:
1. The Canadian public telecommunications networks rely on the integrated North American Numbering Plan to accommodate their numbering requirements, and the 500 and 533 Numbering Plan Area (NPA) codes have been designated for personal communications. Industry Canada is currently the Canadian Numbering Administrator (CNA), and any service provider requiring numbering resources will have to apply to the CNA, at the Telecommunications Policy Branch.
Please clarify that existing numbers in NPA's other than 500 and 533 will be available for customers who have decided to transfer their service from wireline to PCS such that their existing number may be used for PCS services.
Currently, it is not possible for a customer to transfer from a wireline service to a PCS service and retain the existing wireline number. In approximately two years, it is likely that number portability will be available within NPA 500 and the 5XX relief codes that have been assigned for PCS services. It would be necessary for number protability to occur in the wireline services before any wireline numbers could be portable to PCS services. Due to the complexity of portability, it is unlikely to be fully implemented in less than five years.top of page
4. Policy Objectives for Personal Communications Services at 2 GHz
2. Section 4 d) the stimulation of competitive and comprehensive service offerings, provided through the utilization of both existing and new facilities, through, among other measures, the non-discriminatory access by third parties to networks, thereby also promoting value-added services and content;
Please explain the term, "the non-discriminatory access by third parties to networks.
"Non-discriminatory access by third parties to networks" includes the provision by telecommunications carriers of opportunities for other service providers to lease, resell and share their facilities and capacities. Further elaboration is provided in Section 6.6.3 of the policy paper.top of page
6.1.1 Existing and new service providers
3. At Section 6.1.1(b) of the PCS Policy and Call, reference is made "spectrum licensed for cellular mobile radio telephony services in the 800 MHz band, and similar public high-mobility radio telephony services".
- Is the reference to "similar public high-mobility radio telephony services" a reference to ESMR? Is it a reference to any other services?
See the answer to Question 15.
4. Section 6.1.1(d) of the PCS Policy and Call makes reference to an "operating and/or marketing arrangement" between entities "for the provision of uniformly branded or jointly offered telecommunications services."
- Can Industry Canada provide examples of the types of operating and marketing arrangements contemplated by this statement?
The agreements entered into by the shareholders of Mobility Canada would constitute one such arrangement. Similarly, the agreements entered into by the members of Stentor Canadian Network Management would also constitute such an arrangement, as would those of the members of the CableSat consortium.
5. Section 6.1.1 of the PCS Policy and Call allows proposals to be submitted for the divestiture of existing spectrum resources or the implementation of changes in commercial arrangements that allow an entity to be eligible for PCS spectrum licensing.
- Will proposals for divestiture and changes to the commercial relationships of applicants be made public in all cases? If so, when?
The information submitted in this regard will be treated in the manner outlined in section 9.3 Public access to documents. If the applicant clearly identifies the information as confidential, Industry Canada will not make it available for public viewing. However, the information might still be subject to release upon request under the Access to Information Act.
6. Section 6.1.1 contains the statement: "This aggregation consists of: b) spectrum licensed for cellular mobile radiotelephony services in the 800 MHz band, and for similar public high-mobility radiotelephony services, other than air-to-ground telephony and mobile-satellite services;" Which existing and future services does Industry Canada consider to be public high-mobility radiotelephony services (i.e. cellular, ESMR, Mobitex)?
Mobitex is NOT considered a public high-mobility radiotelephony service. See also the answer to Question 15.
7. Section 6.1.1 b) "spectrum licensed for cellular mobile radiotelephony services in the 800 MHz band, and for similar public high-mobility radiotelephony services, other than air-to-ground telephony and mobile-satellite services;"
Section 6.1.1 c) "spectrum as defined in a. and b. above that is licensed to any affiliate of the entity); and, d) spectrum as defined in a) and b) above that is licensed to any other entity which has an operating and/or marketing arrangement with the subject entity (or with any of its affiliates) for the provision of uniformly-branded or jointly-offered telecommunications services."
Does spectrum aggregation include spectrum held by affiliates outside of Canada?
Spectrum aggregation does not include spectrum held outside of Canada. This is the case whether the spectrum held outside Canada is being held directly by the applicant or by an affiliate of the applicant.
8. Please define "geographic area" (page 8). In providing the definition, please clarify whether the area relates to where an entity actually provides service or where an entity is authorized to provide, but does not necessarily, offer service.
"Geographic area" refers to the area in which the entity is authorized to provide service, whether or not the entity actually offers service in that area. The extent of the geographic area is otherwise dependent on the service plans of the applicant.
9. Please clarify what is taken into account in calculating the aggregation of spectrum up to a total of 40 MHz of spectrum. In this regard, please define "similar public high-mobility radiotelephony services" (page 8). For example, does it include SMR/ESMR, PCT, RCC, AMTS type services in other bands (e.g M150, C400), paging, mobile packet data networks, or anything else such as narrowband PCS? Please further clarify how spectrum must be accounted for in calculating the aggregate total of 40 MHz. For purposes of the aggregation requirements of the policy is there a differentiation made between spectrum allocated on an exclusive regional or national basis versus site-specific basis and if so, in what manner?
See the answer to Question 15.
10. The aggregation of spectrum has been described at page 9 as a "limit" which will be in effect during a term of three years from the initial selection of PCS licensees. It is then stated that the "restriction" may be reviewed by Industry Canada. Please confirm that the "limit" and "restriction" address the same matter. We interpret this to mean that an applicant for a block of either 30 MHz or 10 MHz, following the review three years from initial selection, would be eligible to apply for additional spectrum. Is this correct?
"Limit" and "restriction" refer to the same matter. The second part of the question cannot be answered until and unless the review takes place.
11. Please cross-reference the statements made at page 9 with statements made at page 11 that, "Industry Canada will not necessarily license, in the initial selection round, all possible blocks of spectrum, and may instead reserve part of the identified spectrum resources for future services". Does this relate to the three year review or could we apply earlier for added spectrum required by "new services"? If so, please explain how. Do the words "future services" means non point-to-point voice PCS? In light of the above statement, please clarify the meaning of the sentence which follows on page 11, "Once the initial authorization of service providers has been completed, Industry Canada anticipates that no further authorizations for new PCS providers in the 2 GHz band will be issued for the near to intermediate term".
"Future services" refer to the services that could be introduced after the initial selection of PCS public service providers, through the assignment of reserved spectrum. The actual services proffered at that time to the public may or may not replicate the services already in existence. See also the answer to Question 26.
12. What is the relationship between deployment and implementation, related to the roll-out of services, which will be subject to the three year review?
With reference to the three year review, deployment refers to service(s) offered to subscribers and implementation to the stations of the radiocommunication system itself.
13. The Department has noted at page 21 "that the demand for this spectrum will exceed that available". We believe this statement leads the policy toward reserving spectrum to be allocated on to total needs of innovative services licensees and also to those who most closely achieve the policy goals. Is this correct?
The statement merely refers to the Department's reason for using the three phase selection and licensing processes versus its 'first-come, first-served' licensing process for the introduction of PCS in the 2 GHz range.
14. Does the objective of introducing innovative services or widely deployed services have any bearing on the three year review'? If yes, what is the bearing? If no, why not?
It is expected that these objectives would continue to remain relevant, and that the review would determine whether the measures continue to be appropriate.
- Please state explicitly which of the following services are considered "public high mobility radiotelephony services", as referenced in section 5 of the gazette notice:
- Local Paging
- National Paging
- Canada/U.S. Paging
- Wireless Data at 900 MHz
- SMR Service at 800 MHz
- ESMR Service at 800 MHz
- Dispatch at 400 MHz
- Cellular Telephony at 400 MHz
- PCTS Service at 944 MHz
- Narrowband PCS at 900 MHz
- Where the above are shared frequencies (e.g. PCTS), please identify the basis of the assignment to each licensee.
- Local Paging is NOT considered a public high-mobility radiotelephony service.
- National Paging is NOT considered a public high-mobility radiotelephony service.
- Canada/U.S. Paging is NOT considered a public high-mobility radiotelephony service.
- Wireless Data at 900 MHz is NOT considered a public high-mobility radiotelephony service.
- SMR Service at 800 MHz In Canada, the terms Dispatch Mobile Radio and Trunk Mobile Radio, rather than SMR, are used to describe certain operations in a number of mobile bands in the 150, 450, 800 and 900 MHz range. Systems which use an aggregation of frequency assignments to offer primarily local dispatch service, with no hand-off capability, are NOT considered to be providing a public high-mobility radiotelephony service.
- ESMR Service at 800 MHz Systems which offer or are intended to offer public high-mobility radiotelephony services through the deployment of advanced radio equipment that makes use of an aggregation of frequency assignments or specifically allotted spectrum to provide network capabilities, such as wide-area coverage and hand-off, that approach or exceed the capabilities of the conventional cellular network, are considered to be providing a public high-mobility radiotelephony service.
- Dispatch at 400 MHz is NOT considered a public high-mobility radiotelephony service.
- Cellular Telephony at 400 MHz is considered a public high-mobility radiotelephony service.
- PCTS Service at 944 MHz is NOT considered a public high-mobility radiotelephony service.
- Narrowband PCS at 900 MHz. The services which it is currently anticipated will be offered are NOT public high-mobility radiotelephony services.
It is important to note that the entire spectrum licensed for the subject new PCS in the 2 GHz band and for cellular mobile radiotelephony services in the 800 MHz band is included in the calculation of the spectrum aggregation, whether or not that entire spectrum is actually being used for public high-mobility radiotelephony services.
The information required to be submitted in accordance with Section 9.4.3, Phase I of the Call for Applications, will assist Industry Canada in determining the status of the mobile radio operations of each interested applicant, that is, whether such operations constitute the provision of public high-mobility radiotelephony services. Respondents having radio operations subject to such determinations will be informed of their status after Industry Canada has fully studied the information submitted in the Phase I responses.
The latter question is not relevant in light of the above determinations.
16. What level of ownership in an existing radiotelephony service makes one a licence holder or affiliate?
If applicants continue to have concerns about their particular situations, they should make Industry Canada aware of the same in the materials that are submitted in accordance with Section 9.4, Phase I of the Call for Applications.
17. Does a minority shareholder or a PCS entity obtain a proportionate share of the spectrum block, or is the shareholder considered to be a licensee of the full spectrum for the purposes of the 40 MHz restriction?
For the purposes of calculating spectrum aggregation, the entire spectrum held by an entity that is an affiliate of the applicant is included in the spectrum of the applicant. If the degree of ownership of the applicant in another entity is such that the entity is not an affiliate of the applicant, then none of the spectrum held by that entity is attributed to the applicant.
18. In section 6.1 under "Eligibility" and in particular sub-section 6.1.1 "Existing and new service providers", the policy indicates that there will be an aggregation cap of 40 MHz placed on existing operators. Specifically, the services identified in section (b) are "cellular mobile radiotelephony services in the 800 MHz band and for similar public high-mobility radiotelephony services …".
Please confirm that by this section Clearnet is eligible to apply for a full 30 MHz licence. Our interpretation of the policy is that spectrum deployed in an analog SMR mode is not included in the calculation of the 40 MHz spectrum cap since these systems are not providing "public high-mobility radiotelephony ' services similar to cellular services (analog SMR systems offer primarily local dispatch service and have no hand-off capability). We assume that the frequency aggregation rule would include that portion of spectrum which is deployed as part of an Enhanced Specialized mobile radio (ESMR) system as these systems would. in a normal configuration, be capable of providing public high mobility radiotelephony service with wide-area coverage and hand-off capability similar to cellular services.
On a related issue, we assume that any Public Cordless Telephone (PCT) spectrum would not be included due to the low mobility nature of the service
See the answer to Question 15.top of page
6.1.2 Operating areas of licences for new services
19. Are applicants restricted to either regional or nationwide licence applications? For example, does the Department anticipate that nationwide licences might result from an alignment by regional licensees? If an applicant files for both a regional and nationwide licence, will the Department consider one over the other or will both be given equal consideration?
Applicants are not restricted in making applications for either a regional or a national licence. However, given the differences in service and technical plans which would be required for regional and national radiocommunications systems, separate submissions must be provided for each proposal. The Department has not made any predetermination of what may result from any alignments that may occur among applicants. Each application is given equal and fair consideration by the Department. However, as stated, preference in the larger blocks (30 MHz) will be extended to integrated, nation-wide, end-to-end service.
20. Could an applicant receive a nationwide licence but, because of aggregation, be considered as regional within its geographic area? If yes, and assuming that the nationwide licence is for a 30 MHz block of frequency and the regional 10 MHz, will the regional 10 MHz of frequency be separate and apart from the nationwide 30 MHz or will the 10 be taken from the 30?
An applicant that receives a national assignment will be considered national in all geographic areas.
21. It is stated that "preference in the larger blocks will be extended to companies that are capable of supplying integrated, nationwide end-to-end service"
- Please explain the rank ordering of the preferences which will be granted.
- Please define "integrated" service. -Please define "end-to-end service".
- If an entity has near-nationwide coverage (for example, 8 provinces) are they considered regional or nationwide?
- Does this mean "smaller" blocks of 10 MHz or less will go to companies that are not capable of this level of service?
There is no rank ordering of preferences in terms of the question asked.
Integrated means that service is offered in a transparent fashion on the network.
End-to-end here means service that is provided from the mobile unit to the base station and from the base station to the mobile unit.
The Department is not predetermining service to be offered. However, the Department is giving favoured consideration to applicants who undertake to provide the most rapid and the most extensive population and geographic coverage within their identified service areas that provide service to the most extensive population and geographic coverage.
Authorization for the 10 MHz blocks will be based solely on the merits of the applications made for these blocks.
22. Please relate the answers to the questions above [19,20 and 21] regarding regional and nationwide licences to the frequency plan and the six blocks of frequency described at page 7. This question is meant to clarify which blocks are regional as opposed to nationwide rather than the total number of licences to be granted
The frequency blocks are not allocated as regional or national, thus no reference can be made. The service area(s) for each block will be determined when the successful applicants are authorized by the Minister.
23. It is stated that more favoured consideration will be given to applicants "that undertake to provide the most rapid and the most extensive population and geographic coverage within their identified service areas" (page 10). Is this comparison made relative to the applicants for a block of 30 MHz and 10 MHz respectively or is the comparison made between all blocks? More specifically, does the Department have different expectations depending upon whether an applicant applies for 30 as opposed to 10 MHz?
The evaluation is done for the 30 MHz and 10 MHz blocks respectively. The Department does not have different expectations depending on the block applied for.top of page
24. Je souhaiterais avoir plus de détails quant à la signification de la dernière phrase de la section 6.3 à savoir:
"En tout état de cause, on encourage les fournisseurs de certains services à obtenir toutes les approbations réglementaires nécessaires et à effectuer tout arrangement contractuel requis aussitôt que cela s'avère raisonnablement possible suite au processus de sélection."
De quels services s'agit-il? De quelles approbations réglementaires nécessaires et arrangement contractuel sont-ils question?
Les services de SCP dans la gamme 2 GHz. Les approbations réglementaires et arrangement sont, par exemple, ce du CRTC en ce qui concerne les tarifs d'interconnexion du RTCP.
25. How will evaluators determine whether an application is "likely to provide a significant benefit to the public"? What manner of supporting documentation from applicants will assist evaluators in determining this point?
The information provided is self-explanatory and does not require further elaboration.
26. Under section 6.4 "number of PCS licences available", can successful licensees be confident that "near to intermediate term" goes out at least 5-7 years?
It is highly unlikely that new licences would be granted before the earliest possible time within which the review of the spectrum aggregation restriction could be undertaken.top of page
6.5 Technology and technical standards
27. Applicants should provide with their proposals, information about the technical means for and costs of, providing for lawfully warranted interception of communications by law enforcement agencies under Part Vl of the Criminal Code of Canada.
What are the current policies of Industry Canada regarding interception? What changes to this policy is anticipated by Industry Canada?
Technologies deployed to this point have not had the potential to prevent by their very nature the execution of a lawfully obtained warrant. In the case of PCS technologies that potential exists. It is in that context that the policy statement was made and as such does not represent a change in policy. Industry Canada is not currently considering any changes to the stated policy.
28. Will applicants be held to decisions made regarding technology and technical standards identified in their applications? For example, can applicants, if successful, change or modify the technology choice after licenses are granted?
Successful applicants can change or modify their choice of technology after licences are granted provided that the change in technology does not have an effect with respect to the other commitments made in their application.
29. It is stated that, "Industry Canada will not mandate any particular standard at this time". That stated, will the Department use the selection of technology in assessing the merits of an application? If yes, what are the criteria by which the Department will assess the merits of a particular technology?
No, the selection of technology will not be used in assessing the merits of a submission.top of page
6.6.1 Impact on basic telephone service
30. Section 6.6.1 What impact could PCS services have on the principle of universal, affordable access to basic telephone service?
Given the generic nature of this question, to what extent are respective applicants expected to anticipate the impact of different service approaches providing PCS services? Does Industry Canada expect that an applicant will limit the discussion to the specific services that the applicant will propose in the application?
The original question is self-explanatory and does not require further elaboration.top of page
6.6.3 Equality of Competition
31. Section 6.6.3 contains the statement: "It Is expected that applicants will indicate their intention to respect these policies by, for example undertaking to make their future PCS and existing telecommunications facilities available to others on a resale basis." Who will judge the reasonableness of proposed resale tariffs? Will reasonable resale tariffs be a licence requirement? How will resale be regulated?
The CRTC is the agency generally responsible for determining if tariffs are reasonable, and for determining the extent of regulation that is required. Note that in Telecom Decision 94-15 the Commission indicated that "the Commission considers open access to telecommunications networks to be in the public interest. Consistent with this view the Commission considers it necessary to ensure that cellular service and PCTS providers do not unjustly discriminate against other service providers or subscribers, or confer any undue or unreasonable preference, with respect to access to their networks." As stated, applicants will be expected to indicate that they will respect these polices, but resale tariffs will not be made a condition of license.
32. The Department has incorporated by reference government policy from Order in Council P.C. 1994-1689 with respect to facilities-based carriers and has given an example of an applicant's intention to respect these policies by "undertaking to make their future PCS and existing telecommunications facilities available to others on a resale basis". Specifically with respect to PCS, please explain what is meant by "existing telecommunications facilities". Please clarify whether the word "others" refers to other PCS service providers or whether it means any other person?
"Existing telecommunications facilities" refers to telecommunications facilities now used by the applicant for the provision of telecommunications services to the public for compensation. "Others" refers to service providers and other carriers.top of page
6.7 Research and Development
33. Applicants who undertake and/or support research and development equitably distributed among the regions in Canada will be favoured.
Please clarify the term "equitably distributed"?
The information provided is self-explanatory and does not require further elaboration.top of page
34. At Section 6.8.1 of the PCS Policy and Call, it is stated that Industry Canada will be recommending licence fees of $17/MHz/station for limited area systems and $1,700/MHz/station for wide area systems based on the frequency block allotted.
- While we recognize that this is no more than a recommendation from Industry Canada, are applicants expected to utilize such a licence fee proposal in preparing financial models for the Phase II application?
- In the alternative, or in addition to the Industry Canada recommendation, are applicants expected to run financial models based on their own proposals for licence fees, with appropriate explanations?
- Would the Industry Canada recommendation require a licensee to pay for all spectrum assigned, whether or not the assigned spectrum is occupied by fixed station operators or used by the PCS operators?
Applicants should utilize the proposed licence fee in preparing their business plans. Applicants are not expected to use their own proposed licence fees to run financial models. A successful applicant will pay for all assigned spectrum per station.
35. Please clarify definition of "station" in context of assessing license fees. Please confirm that license fees that are suggested in this section are "annual" rates. Please confirm that this fee will be assessed on utilized rather than authorized spectrum bandwidth.
Please illustrate the impact on this fee policy for:
CDMA where a carrier 2 x 1.25 MHz for a total of 2.5 MHz, GSM with a carrier of 2 x 200 KHz for a total of 400 KHz, IS54 with a carrier of 2 x 30 KHz, AMPS with a carrier of 2 x 30 KHz.
Are guardbands included in the bandwidth measurement for fees?
Please clarify status of Cellular "enhancers" or "repeater" respecting license fees.
How will Industry Canada determine < 1 km vs. > 1 km cell radius sites?
Station means a device intended for, or capable of, PCS radiocommunications in the 2 GHz band. The licence fees are annual rates. The recommended station licence fees are based on the authorized PCS block regardless of that actually utilized for PCS. The proposed fees correlate exactly to the average fees of cellular on a per Hz per station basis for the 25 MHz of spectrum available per site for cellular.
The recommended station licence fee is not dependant on technology.
The fees are not based on bandwidth measurements but on the authorized PCS block. Thus, the guardbands are part of the fees.
The recommended licence fees for all PCS stations that cover less than 1 km, are $17/MHz/station
The Department has not finalized how it will determine the radius of the PCS cells, however, it is anticipated the radius of the sites will be based, in part, on the effective radiated power of the station and the antenna height above ground level.
36. Industry Canada has stated its belief that "PCS licence fees should correspond to fees for similar existing services". Examples of fees for "similar existing services" are then provided. However, the Department has advised applicants that it is currently preparing a comprehensive review of the radio licence fee regime. In order to properly prepare business plans, can the Department provide an assurance that the licence fees for PCS will "correspond to fees for similar existing services"? If they will not, please identify how they will be different?
In general the fees in the new fee model will correspond to fees for all other services with the same exclusivity on a per Hz per area basis.
37. In the discussion on fees "smaller area" is defined as "coverage less than 1 kilometre". Is the proportional scaling down a matter of direct proportion? Please explain the calculation with respect to an increase in the coverage area. For example, is the cell that is 1.1 kilometres in radius subject to a licence fee which increases by 100 times? How does this approach relate to CDMA where the cell radius can be variable depending upon the load? For example, does this approach imply that CDMA deployment pay less in licensing fees since they use fewer cells than PCS 1900?
The scaling down is not directly proportional. Any cell with a service radius which exceeds 1 km will pay the $1700/MHz/station fee. The cell radius for the purposes of fees will be based on the largest radius of the cell. Any system utilizing a lesser number of smaller stations will pay a smaller overall licence fee.
38. Does the word "station" refer to a cell site?
Station refers to a device intended for, or capable of, PCS radiocommunications in the 2 GHz band.
39. Please describe how Industry Canada will determine the economic value of the radio frequency resources?
The Department is currently undertaking a review of this matter and it is still under consideration, no determinations have been made at this time.
40. Is "station" (as referenced in section 6.8.1 of the gazette notice) defined as a base station location?
Station refers to a device intended for, or capable of, PCS radiocommunications in the 2 GHz band.
41. With respect to section 6.8.1 dealing with licence fees, we have some difficulty in understanding exactly how the fees would be specifically applied. For example, is a station a cell-site or an RF channel? Can we assume that the fee is a recurring annual charge?
- it would be useful if Industry Canada could provide an example as to how the fees would be applied to the different PCS technologies currently being considered by industry (e.g. CDMA vs GSM) given their different bandwidth requirements. Because different PCS technologies use different numbers of cells to cover the same area, how will fees be made technology neutral?
- Will fees be ramped up in the initial start-up phase in accordance with revenues? Is it Industry Canada's intention to ensure that new PCS operators start-up fee curves will be similar to those of the cellcos? This ramp up would obviously have a direct impact on financial capability and subscriber rates.
Station means a device intended for, or capable of, PCS radiocommunications in the 2 GHz band. The fee for each station is an annual fee.
The fees are not dependant on technology, they are based on a per station per allotted MHz of spectrum basis regardless of the actual amount of spectrum used by the station.
The fees for PCS in the 2 GHz band are not related to revenue. However, the fees will ramp-up as more stations are installed. In the new fee regime, consideration is being given to a similar concept of start-up fee curves.top of page
6.8.2 Conditions of licence
42. Since the Department will incorporate matters contained in applications, does this mean that the conditions of licence (apart from the generic conditions described) will be different for each PCS licensee?
Licence conditions for each PCS licensee may differ as they will likely be based on specific commitments by the successful applicants. However, the Department also sees merit in minimizing the differences, if any.top of page
7.2 Policy provisions for PCS
43. The footnote on page 17 provides priority for certain existing fixed stations over mobile service until July 1, 1997 and after that date displacement where necessary. On page 18, it is stated that, "for any fixed frequency assignment subject to displacement, the notification period will be a minimum of four years". Does this mean that existing microwave stations are required to move by July 1, 1997 or is it necessary for a successful applicant to provide four years notice from the date of the licence being granted (which would not mean movement until December 1999)? Does the two year minimum notification period for cellular carriers only apply in the event of a successful application for a PCS licence?
The displacement provisions of fixed stations to provide spectrum for licensed PCS systems are indicated in section 7.4, items a) to f) inclusively . The footnote C 35 on page 17 is the actual text of the Canadian Table of Frequency Allocations which designated spectrum for PCS. The July 1, 1997 date establishes the priority of the allocation of the fixed and mobile services. The transition between the services after this date is governed by the spectrum transition policies contained in this document. Existing microwave facilities operating on frequency assignments required for PCS implementation are required to vacate the spectrum after a period of either 2 or 4 years (as provided in section 7.4, item c)) from the dates of notifications issued by Industry Canada. A notification cannot be given before the licences are awarded and a PCS operator has established the need for the spectrum in the particular service area.
The minimum notification period of 2 years applies in all cases to PCS licensees, their affiliates and the cellular carriers, regardless of the age of the radio equipment operating on the specific frequency assignments subject for displacement.top of page
7.4 Transition provisions for licensed PCS
44. "Section 7.4 a) Notification for displacement of specific frequency assignments of fixed stations to make spectrum, where necessary, available in certain geographical areas will begin to be served after PCS licences have been awarded. Industry Canada will issue a set of operating guidelines, in the near future, outlining the displacement process and the related spectrum sharing criteria for coordination."
When will the "operating guidelines" be released?
Industry Canada is presently developing a set of operating guidelines which will implement the spectrum transition policy provisions and outline, among other things, the process for the serving of displacement notice. We expect to have a draft available in the Fall of 1995. It is noted that adequate information is contained in the policy for PCS applicants and existing fixed microwave users to fully understand the displacement dimensions and to start planning for eventual displacements of microwave installations, as necessary.
45. "Section 7.4 c) For any fixed frequency assignment subject to displacement, the notification period will be a minimum of 4 years for microwave equipment that has been licensed for 10 years or less at the time of the notification, with the exception of frequency assignments authorized to PCS licensees and their affiliates (as referred to earlier in this document), and the cellular carriers, in which case a minimum notification period of 2 years will apply. Frequency assignments for which the microwave equipment has been licensed for more than 10 years at the time of notification will be given a minimum notification period of 2 years. Earlier displacement may be achieved through mutual agreements between PCS operator(s) and the affected fixed station operator(s)."
What is the notification period for a spectrum incumbent that is not an affiliate or an applicant of an applicant but is a direct competitor to a licensee (i.e. telco)?
Again, the minimum notification periods of either 2 or 4 years for any fixed frequency assignment subject to be displaced will be based on the period of time that the microwave equipment has been licensed, when the actual notice is being served, with the exception of frequency assignments authorized to PCS, their affiliates and the Cellular carriers for which a minimum notification period of 2 years will apply in all cases. There is no other provision made in the notification periods for the spectrum transition policy.
46. Referring to section 7.4 "Transition provisions for licensed PCS", and noting from the press release that PCS licences are expected to be awarded in late l995, is the July 1, 1997 date really meaningful?
- As indicated under section 7.4 (a), when can we expect to see a set of operating guidelines which outline the displacement process and the related spectrum sharing criteria for coordination?
- The second paragraph of subsection (f) discusses PCS operators who are also fixed service operators. Can we assume that this paragraph also addresses affiliates of PCS licensees?
See the answers to questions 43 and 44 respectively.The precise transition provisions are outlined in section 7.4, items a) to f) inclusively. The paragraph which follows item f) of section 7.4, serves as examples to indicate potential actions that Industry Canada may take with respect to certain situations, among others, to ensure the orderly development of PCS service and to foster the objectives outlined in the policy.top of page
7.5 License Exempt Devises
47. To what extent is Industry Canada expecting applicants to respond to this issue in their applications?
The Department does not expect applicants to respond to this issue in their applications.top of page
9.4 Selection and licensing process
48. We would appreciate confirmation that in the event Industry Canada should have concerns with respect to whether an Applicant in it's Phase One "expression of interest" complies with the provisions of Section 16 of the Telecommunications Act or of the Canadian Telecommunications Common Carrier Ownership and Control Regulations, such Applicant would be given a reasonable opportunity before rejection of its application to discuss with Industry Canada the offending agreements or provisions and, if problems continue to exist, to amend or vary its agreements or structure (prior to the Phase Two deadline) to ensure compliance.
Submissions are not rejected out of hand based on an applicant not meeting the above provisions, in particular the control in fact determinations. Such a matter would be subject to a separate review which would provide the applicant an opportunity to discuss with the Department the matter action that need be taken to satisfy any concerns.
49. Section 9.4.3 Applicants must provide a detailed description of their corporate ownership and control structure and provide an attestation that the applicant meets or will meet the provisions of section 16 of the Telecommunications Act and of the Canadian Telecommunications Common Carrier Ownership and Control Regulations. This should include copies of any agreements related to control in fact of the company, a list of the principals, affiliates and consortium members, if applicable, and their backgrounds. It should also include a description of the applicant's and, if applicable, the principals' corporate experience in the provision of telecommunications services or other related experience.
Please define "attestation"
Attestation is a written declaration that the party meets and has read and understood, and to the best of their knowledge adheres to the requirements of the Act and regulations. Such an attestation must be signed by a duly authorized officer of the company.
50. Will Industry Canada accept submissions on CD-ROM?
The Department will accept the electronic versions of the submissions on CD-ROM.
51. Section 9.5.1 "audited financial statements of the parent company or affiliates for the past three (3) full fiscal years, if applicable;"
Please define "parent company". Please clarify Industry Canada's preferred format for financial data and the level of detail requested.
A parent company is an incorporated company that has controlling interest in another company.
Audited financial statements include: audited Income Statement, audited Statement of Retained Earnings, audited Balance Sheet, the Auditor's Opinion, and the Notes to the statements.
52. Section 9.5.4 Consideration is being given to the use of performance guarantees to ensure compliance to the system implementation plans as described in an applicant's detailed submission and to avoid the premature displacement of fixed microwave links. For example, a guarantee could consist of, but not be limited to, monetary commitments equivalent to the loss of radio licence fee revenue to the Crown for failure to respect system implementation plans.
Will Industry Canada consider the merits of a proposal for performance guarantee in the selection process of the comparative review? In the event that performance guarantees are elected by Industry Canada, will each licensee be subject to the same guarantee? If not, will the applicants proposal be applied to a successful applicant?
All information requested will be given fair and complete consideration during the review. The
Department has not as yet determined the form performance guarantees or any of the conditions that would apply. However, the Department will endeavour to make all conditions as uniform as possible.
53. Section 9.5.6 "the in-house staff allocated to research and development;"
Will in-house staff allocated to research and development be considered more favourably that contractual arrangements for R&D?
All aspects of this evaluation criteria are not made public.
54. Is it mandatory for an entity to provide an expression of interest? In other words, could an entity file an application during phase two of the process if it did not file an expression of interest in phase one?
An applicant must submit all the information requested for phase I and phase II as outlined in Section 9 of the document. The Department would prefer that all applicants follow the guidelines for submission outlined in the document. The Department will not reject out of hand any applicant that does not follow these guidelines and will give their submissions fair and complete consideration.
55. There are a number of criteria set out in the document. Do all of these criteria have the same weight or do some have a disproportionate weight? If it is disproportionate, please identify the relative weight of the various criteria.
All aspects of the evaluation criteria are not made public.
56. Does applying in Phase I under one entity preclude one from applying under a different entity (e.g. an affiliate or subsidiary) in Phase II?
No, it does not preclude an applicant for applying under a different entity.
57. Can applicants apply in Phase II for a frequency block that is different from the one filed during Phase I either individually or as part of a consortium?
Yes an applicant may.
58. For the Phase II application, can an applicant apply for a different size block than that filed in Phase I if that applicant: a) prefers a different block, or b) comes into compliance with the spectrum aggregation rules after the expression of interest has been submitted?
Yes an applicant may.
59. An attestation regarding compliance with the ownership and control provisions of the Telecom Act is being requested as part of the Phase I application. What form should this attestation take?
Attestation is a written declaration that the party meets and has read and understood, and to the best of their knowledge adhere to the requirements of the Act and regulations. Such an attestation must be signed by a duly authorized officer of the company.top of page
9.6 Filing Address
60. At section 9.6 of the PCS Policy and call, the filing address is indicated to be at Industry Canada's offices in Ottawa, Ontario.
- Will Industry Canada also accept service of Phase I and Phase II written submissions at any of Industry Canada's regional offices?
Yes, submissions will be accepted at the Department's regional offices. However, the Department would prefer that all applicants follow the procedures outlined in the document.
- Date modified: