That sounds like 3650-3700 will remain unusable in the existing exclusion
zones, but those zones won't apply at all to 3550-3650, correct?

On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 11:48 AM, Patrick Leary <[email protected]>
wrote:

>  This is one of the things the R&O has to say on the matter:
>
>
>
> (c) Grandfathered Wireless Broadband Licensees and Citizens Broadband
> Radio Service users
>
> must protect authorized grandfathered FSS earth stations in the 3650-3700
> MHz band, consistent with the
>
> existing protection criteria in part 90, subpart Z until the last
> Grandfathered Wireless Broadband
>
> Licensee’s license expires within the protection area defined for a
> particular grandfathered FSS earth
>
> station. Thereafter, the protection criteria in section 96.17 applicable
> to similarly situated facilities shall
>
> apply.
>
>
>
> *Patrick Leary*
>
> *M* 727.501.3735
>
> <http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Patrick Leary
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 27, 2015 12:40 PM
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 3.5GHz
>
>
>
> Yes, but not right away. Once the SAS is up things will change.
>
>
>
> *Patrick Leary*
>
> *M* 727.501.3735
>
> <http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] *On
> Behalf Of *Graham McIntire
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 27, 2015 12:36 PM
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 3.5GHz
>
>
>
> Does anybody know if the new rules change anything with the ground earth
> station exclusion zones? TowerStream purchased the (unused) station here in
> Dallas and has forced other companies to pay them a licensing & engineering
> fees.
>
> I've had a nation-wide license since they were available, but can't
> register any sites because I'm in the exclusion zone.
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Adam Moffett <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I had a bunch pending that went through a couple of days ago.
>
>  I still have a couple of registrations sitting pending, but supposedly
> they are still going through.... I think the FCC is just behind because of
> everyone trying to get in before the 4/17 deadline.
>
> I would expect we will be hearing more once the SAS is online, yeah.
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 4:12 PM, Brett A Mansfield <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> This is excellent, thank you.  I assume that we will learn more as the SAS
> comes online? And are any of the registrations going through now? Last time
> I registered a link it took 2 months and I had to hound the FCC a lot about
> it until they finally just did it so I'd stop annoying them.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Brett A Mansfield
>
>
> On May 20, 2015, at 2:59 PM, Mathew Howard <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>   There's been some pretty good discussions on the WISPA list... here's
> what I've been able to decipher:
>
> Yes, you can still use 3.65
>
> Yes, you can still register links
>
> Yes, you still need a license - you actually have to already have one to
> use 3.65 at this point, since the FCC isn't issuing anymore licenses under
> the old rules, but that would just be your existing NN license (assuming
> you have one - which you do if you've ever registered anything in 3.65)
>
> No, you can't use 3.55-3.65 yet - we have to wait until equipment is
> available and the SAS is up and running.
>
> You can keep using links that are already there as long as you want to...
> there will be some changes in 2020, but as far as I can tell we won't ever
> have to take down existing links. anything that was registered before April
> 17th (and actually installed by 4/17/2016) gets special protected status
> from gear that's operating under the new rules.
>
> For the most part, nothing really changes for now - you can/have to keep
> registering everything in ULS the same as always and you can keep using the
> same equipment. When the SAS is in place and some radios support it, things
> will change.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Brett A Mansfield <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> Anyone know much about the new FCC rules on 3.5GHz? I have read article
> after article and still don't really understand what is going on. I know of
> a 3-tier system and a GAA, but nothing elaborates on it.
>
> My questions are:
>
> Can I still use 3.65?
> Can I still register new links?
> Do I still need a license?
> If so, how to obtain said license for new links?
> Can I use the newly available 3.5-3.65 GHz now?
> I do have a few links already registered. What will happen with those?
>
> I'm not completely dumb (I don't think), but I certainly don't speak
> legal. I need a clear explanation dumbed down to my level of understanding
> (maybe I'm dumber than I think).
>
>
> Thank you,
> Brett A Mansfield
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ************************************************************************************
> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer
> viruses.
>
> ************************************************************************************
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ************************************************************************************
> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer
> viruses.
>
> ************************************************************************************
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ************************************************************************************
> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer
> viruses.
>
> ************************************************************************************
>
>
>
>
>
> ************************************************************************************
> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer
> viruses.
>
> ************************************************************************************
>
>

Reply via email to