[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 58 (Wednesday, May 1, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Page S4514]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          FCC'S PAGING FREEZE

  Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, on February 8, 1996, the Federal 
Communications Commission issued a notice of proposed rulemaking which 
proposed to fundamentally change the way in which paging systems are 
licensed. The FCC adopted a freeze on the filing of paging 
applications, which immediately brought about many harmful effects. I 
promptly expressed my concerns to the FCC about its actions and asked 
Chairman Hundt to do something about the freeze in a letter dated 
March, 15, 1996.
  I am glad to say that on April 23, 1996, the FCC issued an order 
demonstrating it had listened to my concerns and the concerns of the 
industry with regard to the paging freeze. The FCC has modified the 
freeze so that existing paging carriers can apply to expand their 
systems by putting transmitters within 40 miles of stations they 
already are operating, so long as these stations were licensed before 
the freeze. The FCC also has decided against retroactively applying the 
freeze and will now process all applications which were filed before 
the February 8 freeze date.
  These are two very important steps towards mitigating the harmful 
impact of the freeze, and I wish to congratulate the FCC on its 
response. However, it has come to my attention there are some 
significant shortcomings in the mechanics of the new rules. With minor 
clarifications, the FCC could eliminate these shortcomings.
  In particular, the industry believes--and several Members of Congress 
agree--75 miles would be a more appropriate zone of expansion as 
opposed to 40 miles. The increased distance would allow existing paging 
businesses to accommodate their customers' immediate needs and respond 
to new requests for paging service as factories, hospitals, and 
neighborhoods are constructed and the need for paging coverage expands.
  Paging companies should be allowed to apply for new transmitters 
within 75 miles of any transmitter which has been licensed or which 
will be licensed based on an application filed before the freeze. The 
point is, many expansion proposals were filed by paging companies more 
than 1 year ago, and have been delayed at the FCC. These applications 
reflect expansions that were needed months ago. Indeed, these carriers 
now are receiving requests for further expansions. If we limit paging 
companies to a zone 40 miles from transmitters already licensed and 
operating, the only expansion they may be able to achieve would be 
adding those locations for which they applied last year. Additional 
coverage needs in the coming months will go unmet.
  Another problem is created by the FCC's proposal to allow anyone to 
file a competing application against the expansion proposals of 
existing carriers. The FCC has defended the freeze as a mechanism to 
prevent filing by speculators and application mills, many of which use 
the application process to defraud consumers out of their life savings. 
This is a worthy goal. However, the new rule contains an ironic twist. 
If anyone can file a competing application against an existing paging 
carrier's expansion, speculation and fraudulent filings will be 
encouraged. The application mills that currently are not able to file 
applications will now target each and every expansion proposal, because 
it will be their only opportunity to practice their unholy trade. This 
will allow continued consumer fraud. It also will prevent bona fide 
paging companies from expanding their coverage, since any expansion 
proposal which is filed against will be held in abeyance and probably 
dismissed. This result would nullify the good work of the FCC in 
modifying the freeze. I strongly suspect it is an unintended result.

  To prevent this anomalous result, the FCC can make minor adjustments 
to its freeze modification order: First, allowing a 75-mile expansion 
zone; second, allowing the expansion sites to be established within 75 
miles of any transmitter granted from an application filed before the 
freeze; and third, limiting competing applicants to other carriers.
  It is vital the FCC take steps to mitigate the harmful effects of the 
freeze. The paging industry provides service to over 34 million 
subscribers. Industry members have been encouraged to make considerable 
investments to improve their services, and have relied in good faith on 
the FCC's published regulations. Paging services are designed to serve 
the needs of increasingly mobile customers. To be competitive, these 
businesses need to provide their service to the customers where and 
when they need it. If a paging service cannot respond to the needs of 
its existing and potential customers, it will not survive in this 
extremely competitive industry.
  This competition has spurred technological advances in what can be 
communicated over a pager. No longer is a pager some simple little box 
that beeps to let you know you should call your office. Today's pagers 
are vehicles for communicating written messages. For example, news 
organizations like Reuters now offer periodic summaries of breaking 
news stories through pagers. Pagers also provide cost-efficient means 
of communicating within large factory complexes. Additionally, we must 
not forget the lifesaving contribution these services make when used by 
doctors, ambulance crews, and critically ill patients, to summon 
assistance in the event of an emergency.
  The bottom line, Mr. President, is that this technology must be 
allowed to grow. That was the basis for my letter in March. At the same 
time, the process must not be so full of loopholes as to allow the 
unscrupulous to benefit at the expense of consumers. That is the 
challenge faced by the FCC. It has begun meeting the challenge by 
modifying its freeze on the filing of paging applicants. The flaws in 
its initial proposal should prove easy to address. As chairman of the 
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, I stand 
ready to help this process in any reasonable manner.

                          ____________________