Proposed Rule2025-13170
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Designates for Hearing Dispute Regarding C-Band Reimbursement Claims
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
July 15, 2025
Issuing agencies
Federal Communications Commission
Abstract
In this document, the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (WTB or Bureau) grants Anuvu Licensing Holdings, LLC's Petition for De Novo Review (Anuvu) and commences a hearing in connection with the 3.7-4.2 GHz Band (C-band) Transition Relocation Payment Clearinghouse's (RPC or clearinghouse) decision which denied Anuvu's cost reimbursement claims as they relate to its Raisting, Germany site. The issues designated for hearing are whether Anuvu met its burden of proof to demonstrate that the RPC erred in its finding that the claims were not compensable in- so-far as they relate to the Raisting site, which is located outside the United States; whether the RPC properly applied Commission guidance to the claims in question; and whether the disallowed amount of $960,694.35 should be reimbursed to Anuvu.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 133 (Tuesday, July 15, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 133 (Tuesday, July 15, 2025)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31595-31597]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-13170]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 27
[WT Docket No. 21-333; DA 25-527; FR ID 302623]
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Designates for Hearing Dispute
Regarding C-Band Reimbursement Claims
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Notification of hearing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (WTB
or Bureau) grants Anuvu Licensing Holdings, LLC's Petition for De Novo
Review (Anuvu) and commences a hearing in connection with the 3.7-4.2
GHz Band (C-band) Transition Relocation Payment Clearinghouse's (RPC or
clearinghouse) decision which denied Anuvu's cost reimbursement claims
as they relate to its Raisting, Germany site. The issues designated for
hearing are whether Anuvu met its burden of proof to demonstrate that
the RPC erred in its finding that the claims were not compensable in-
so-far as they relate to the Raisting site, which is located outside
the United States; whether the RPC properly applied Commission guidance
to the claims in question; and whether the disallowed amount of
$960,694.35 should be reimbursed to Anuvu.
DATES: Anuvu shall file a written appearance by July 8, 2025 stating
its intention to appear on the date fixed for the hearing and present
evidence on the issues specified in the Hearing Designation Order.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 45 L St. NE, Washington,
DC 20554.
People with Disabilities. To request materials in accessible
formats (braille, large print, electronic files, audio format) for
people with disabilities, send an email to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#aec8cdcd9b9e9aeec8cdcd80c9c1d8"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="abcdc8c89e9b9febcdc8c885ccc4dd">[email protected]</span></a> or call the
Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information on this
proceeding, contact Paul Powell of the Wireless Telecommunications
Bureau, at (202) 418-1613 or <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#aefecfdbc280fec1d9cbc2c2eec8cdcd80c9c1d8"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="9eceffebf2b0cef1e9fbf2f2def8fdfdb0f9f1e8">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Hearing Designation
Order, Anuvu Hearing Designation Order, released on June 18, 2025. The
full text of this document is available for public inspection online at
<a href="https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-25-527A1.pdf">https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-25-527A1.pdf</a>.
1. By this Hearing Designation Order, pursuant to sections 0.131,
0.331, and 27.1421(c) of the Commission's rules, the Expanding Flexible
Use of the 3.7 to 4.2 GHz Band, 35 FCC Rcd 2343 (3.7 GHz Report and
Order), and the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Announces Procedures
for Appeals of Relocation Payment Clearinghouse Decisions, WT Docket
No. 21-333, Public Notice, DA 22-300 (RPC Appeals Procedures Public
Notice), the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (Bureau) grants a
Petition for De Novo Review (Petition), filed on April 4, 2025, by
Anuvu Licensing Holdings, LLC. (Anuvu) and designates this case to be
tried as a written proceeding under the Commission's rules for hearing
proceedings, with the Administrative Law Judge serving as the presiding
officer. As discussed below, the issues designated for hearing relate
to the 3.7-4.2 GHz Band (C-band) Transition Relocation Payment
Clearinghouse's (RPC or clearinghouse) decision which denied Anuvu's
actual cost reimbursement claims as they relate to its Raisting,
Germany (Raisting) earth station site.
2. In the 3.7 GHz Report and Order, the Commission adopted rules to
make 280 megahertz of mid-band spectrum available for flexible use
throughout the contiguous United States by transitioning existing
services out of the lower portion of the band and into the upper 200
megahertz of the C-band. The Commission required new 3.7 GHz Service
licensees to reimburse the reasonable relocation costs of eligible
Fixed Satellite Service (FSS) space station operators, incumbent FSS
earth station operators, and incumbent Fixed Service licensees
(collectively, incumbents) to transition out of the band. The 3.7 GHz
Report and Order also specified that incumbent FSS earth station
operators may accept either: (1) reimbursement for their actual,
reasonable relocation costs ``needed to transition existing operations
in the contiguous United States out of the lower 300 megahertz of the
C-band''; or (2) a lump sum reimbursement ``based on the average,
estimated costs of relocating all of their incumbent earth stations''
to the upper 200 megahertz of the C-band.
3. The 3.7 GHz Report and Order further provided for the creation
of an independent clearinghouse to administer, subject to the
Commission's rules and oversight, the cost-related aspects of the
transition in a fair and transparent manner, ``to mitigate financial
disputes among stakeholders, and to collect and distribute payments in
a timely manner.'' To provide the clearinghouse, incumbents, and new
3.7 GHz Service licensees with a range of reasonable transition costs,
the 3.7 GHz Report and Order directed the Bureau to establish a cost
catalog of the types of expenses that incumbents were likely to incur.
The Commission directed the clearinghouse to presume as reasonable all
actual cost reimbursement submissions that fall within the estimated
range of costs in the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Releases Final
Cost Category Schedule for 3.7-4.2 GHz Band Relocation Expenses and
Announces Process and Deadline for Lump Sum Elections, 35 FCC Rcd 7967
(Final Cost Catalog Public Notice) produced by the Bureau. Incumbents
seeking reimbursement for their actual costs are not precluded from
including costs that exceed the amounts in the Final Cost Catalog
Public Notice, so long as those costs are reasonably necessary to the
transition, and incumbents provide justification to the clearinghouse.
4. All reimbursement claims--whether for actual costs or lump sum
amounts--must be submitted to the clearinghouse for review pursuant to
section 27.1416 of the Commission's rules. The clearinghouse ``will
determine in the first instance whether costs submitted for
reimbursement are reasonable'' and whether they comply with the
requirements adopted in the 3.7 GHz Report and Order. To the extent a
claimant or one or more responsible 3.7 GHz Service licensees wish to
dispute the clearinghouse's determination with respect to a submitted
claim, they must file a notice of objection as required by section
27.1421(a) of the Commission's rules. The clearinghouse may in the
first instance mediate any disputes or refer the disputant parties to
alternative dispute resolution fora. Subsequent appeals to the Bureau
may be submitted pursuant to the procedures set forth in the RPC
Appeals Procedures Public Notice. Following a Bureau decision in either
a single-party or multi-party dispute, any party to a specific matter
wishing to appeal that decision may do so by filing with the
Commission,
[[Page 31596]]
within ten (10) days of the effective date of the Bureau decision, a
petition for de novo review, whereupon the Commission will set the
matter for an evidentiary hearing before an Administrative Law Judge.
5. Anuvu's RPC Claims. Anuvu is an earth station operator with
multiple antennas registered with the Commission at its Holmdel, NJ
(Holmdel) site, which appear on the incumbent earth station list for
purposes of the C-band transition. Anuvu filed two claims with the RPC
on January 30, 2024 and June 21, 2024, seeking $1,287,214.13 as actual
cost reimbursement for system modifications performed at Holmdel as
well as its separate Raisting, Germany (Raisting) earth station site.
Specifically, Anuvu requested $326,519.78 for C-band related equipment
and installation work at Holmdel, and $960,694.35 for C-band related
equipment and installation work at Raisting. After review of Anuvu's
claims and supplemental information provided by the claimant, the RPC
Decisional Memorandum was issued on December 4, 2024, fully approving
Anuvu's claims as they relate to the Holmdel site. The RPC denied in
full Anuvu's claims as they relate to the Raisting site given its
location outside the United States. Anuvu filed a notice of objection
with the RPC for the denied portion of its claims on December 20, 2024,
seeking payment of the full amount. On January 13, 2025, Anuvu received
payment for the undisputed amount of $326,519.78.
6. Anuvu's Appeal to the Bureau. Anuvu filed a single-party appeal
on February 10, 2025, asking the Bureau to order the RPC to reimburse
the disallowed amount of $960,694.35. The RPC filed its response on
February 24, 2025. Anuvu filed its reply on March 3, 2025. The instant
matter arises from the Bureau's denial of Anuvu's appeal of the RPC's
decision.
7. The RPC Appeals Procedures Public Notice allows any party to a
specific single-party or multi-party dispute to appeal a Bureau
decision on disputed issues relating to an RPC reimbursement decision
by petitioning for an evidentiary hearing before an Administrative Law
Judge. The petition for a hearing must be filed within ten (10) days of
the effective date of the Bureau order.
8. Anuvu filed its appeal of the Bureau's decision within ten (10)
days of the effective date thereof, and we thus find that the Petition
satisfies the requirements of the RPC Appeals Procedures Public Notice.
Therefore, the Petition is hereby granted, and the disputed issues are
designated for hearing.
9. Written Hearings Report and Order. The Commission recently
supplemented its formal hearing processes by adopting rules that, inter
alia, expand the use of a hearing procedure that relies in appropriate
cases on written submissions and documentary evidence. These hearing
proceedings shall be resolved on a written record consisting of
affirmative case, responsive case, and reply case submissions, along
with all associated evidence in the record, including stipulations and
agreements of the parties and official notice of material facts. Based
on that record, the presiding officer will issue an Initial Decision
pursuant to section 409(a) of the Communications Act and sections 1.267
and 1.274(c) of the Commission's rules. The Bureau finds that this is
an appropriate case for use of those procedures.
10. Notice of Appearance. Parties to this matter who wish to avail
themselves of the opportunity to participate in the hearing proceeding
must file a written appearance consistent with sections 1.221(d) and
1.221(e) of the Commission's rules. The written appearance must be
filed within twenty (20) days of the mailing of this Hearing
Designation Order and must state, among other things, that they will
present evidence on the matters specified in this order, and, if
required, appear before a presiding officer at a time and place to be
determined (which shall be no earlier than thirty (30) days after
receipt of this order).
11. Initial Case Order. After release of this Hearing Designation
Order, the presiding officer shall promptly release an Initial Case
Order. The Initial Case Order shall put all parties on notice that they
are expected to be fully cognizant of part 1 of the Commission's rules
concerning Practice and Procedure, 47 CFR part 1, subparts A and B. The
Initial Case Order shall also set a date for the initial status
conference and a date by which each party should file a pre-conference
submission that would include: (a) whether discovery is expected in
this case, and if so, a proposed discovery schedule; (b) any
preliminary motions they are intending to file; and (c) a proposed case
schedule. The parties' pre-conference submissions should also indicate
whether they request that a Protective Order be entered in this case.
12. Initial Status Conference and Initial Status Conference Order.
The presiding officer shall set the case schedule, including any
deadlines by which the parties should submit the motions they
identified in their pre-conference submissions. The presiding officer
shall also set the deadlines for the parties' affirmative case,
responsive case, and reply case submissions in accordance with sections
1.371-1.375 of the Commission's rules. If the parties have requested
the entrance of a Protective Order, the presiding officer shall also
set a deadline by which a joint proposed Protective Order shall be
submitted for consideration. In accordance with section 1.248(b) of the
Commission's rules, the presiding officer may adopt the case schedule
during the status conference or in an order following the conference.
13. Additional status conferences may be scheduled throughout the
course of the proceeding at the request of the parties and/or at the
discretion of the presiding officer. Any request by a party for a
status conference must be made in writing to the presiding officer and
shall be copied on all other parties.
14. Transcripts. In accordance with section 1.248 of the
Commission's rules, an official transcript of all case conferences
shall be made, unless the parties and the presiding officer agree to
forego a transcript. Transcripts shall be made available to the public
as part of the official record in the Commission's Electronic Comment
Filing System (ECFS) in WT Docket No. 21-333.
15. Requests for Admissions. In accordance with section 1.246 of
the Commission's rules, any party may serve upon any other party
written requests for the admission of the genuineness of any relevant
documents or of the truth of any relevant matters of fact. Such
requests shall be served within twenty (20) days after the deadline for
filing a notice of appearance unless the presiding officer sets a
different time frame.
16. Available Discovery Methods. Sections 1.311 through 1.325 of
the Commission's rules set forth procedures that may be used for the
discovery of relevant facts and/or for the production and preservation
of evidence for use in the hearing proceeding. These sections of the
Commission's rules provide, inter alia, for the taking of depositions,
for interrogatories, and for the production of documents and things.
17. Evidentiary Rules. In the Written Hearings Report and Order,
the Commission amended section 1.351 of the Commission's rules to adopt
the evidentiary standard set forth in the formal APA hearing
requirements. In relevant part, section 1.351 of the Commission's rules
now states, ``any oral or documentary evidence may be adduced, but the
presiding officer shall exclude irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly
repetitious evidence.'' The
[[Page 31597]]
parties remain free to make evidentiary arguments based on the Federal
Rules of Evidence.
18. Petitions to Intervene. Any person or entity seeking status as
a party in interest in this proceeding must file a petition to
intervene in accordance with section 1.223(a) of the Commission's
rules. Any person or entity seeking to participate in this proceeding
as a party may file a petition for leave to intervene in accordance
with section 1.223(b) of the Commission's rules.
19. Motions to Enlarge, Change or Delete Issues. Motions to
enlarge, change, or delete issues to be considered in this proceeding
shall be allowed, consistent with section 1.229 of the Commission's
rules.
20. Restricted Proceeding. This hearing proceeding is a
``restricted'' proceeding pursuant to section 1.1208 of the
Commission's rules and thus ex parte presentations to or from
Commission decision-making personnel, including the presiding officer
and her staff and staff of the Commission's Wireless Telecommunications
Bureau, are prohibited, except as otherwise provided in the
Commission's rules.
21. Electronic Filing of Documents. All written submissions such as
motions, letters, discovery requests and objections and written
responses thereto, excluding confidential and/or other protected
material, must be filed in WT Docket No. 21-333 using ECFS. ECFS shall
also act as the repository for records of actions taken in this
proceeding, excluding confidential and/or other protected material, by
the presiding officer and the Commission. Documents responsive to any
party's requests for production of documents should not be filed in
ECFS. Such responsive documents shall be served directly on counsel for
the party requesting the documents and produced either in hard copy or
in electronic form (e.g., hard drive, thumb drive) with files named in
such a way as it is clear how the documents are organized.
22. Case Caption. The caption of any pleading filed in this
proceeding, as well as all letters, documents, or other written
submissions including discovery requests and objections and responses
thereto, shall indicate whether it is to be acted upon by the
Commission or the presiding officer. The presiding officer shall be
identified by name.
23. Service. All documents submitted in this proceeding must also
be served on all other parties in accordance with section 1.211 of the
Commission's rules and shall be accompanied by a proof of service.
Service on the Enforcement Bureau shall be made using the following
email address: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#40050208252132292e2733002623236e272f36"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="0c494e44696d7e65626b7f4c6a6f6f226b637a">[email protected]</span></a>.
24. Confidential and/or Otherwise Protected Materials. To the
extent any party to this proceeding wishes to submit materials or
information that it would like withheld from the public record, it may
do so in accordance with the procedures set forth in section 1.314 of
the Commission's rules. The parties may also enter into a Protective
Order. As stated above, requests for a Protective Order should be made
in the parties' pre-conference submission in accordance with the
schedule set forth in the Initial Case Order.
25. Initial Decision. The presiding officer shall issue an Initial
Decision on the issues set forth herein, as well as any other issues
designated for hearing in the course of the proceeding. This Initial
Decision shall contain, at a minimum, findings of fact and conclusions
of law, as well as the reasons or basis therefor, and the appropriate
rule or order or policy and the sanction, relief or denial thereof, as
appropriate.
26. Accordingly, it is ordered that the Petition for De Novo
Review, filed on April 4, 2025, by Anuvu, is granted.
27. It is further ordered that, pursuant to the RPC Appeals
Procedures Public Notice, this matter, as described above, is
designated for hearing before an Administrative Law Judge, at a time
and place to be specified in a subsequent order, on the following
issues:
a. To determine whether Anuvu met its burden of proof to
demonstrate that the RPC erred in its finding that the claims were not
compensable in-so-far as they relate to the Raisting site, which is
located outside the United States;
b. To determine whether the RPC properly applied Commission
guidance to the claims in question; and
c. To determine whether the disallowed amount of $960,694.35 should
be reimbursed to Anuvu.
28. It is further ordered that the burden of proceeding with the
introduction of evidence and the burden of proof with respect to all
issues specified herein shall be upon Anuvu.
29. It is further ordered that Anuvu Licensing Holdings, LLC
(Anuvu) is made a party to the proceeding pursuant to section 1.221(d)
of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.221(d). To avail itself of the
opportunity to be heard, pursuant to section 1.221(e) of the
Commission's rules, Anuvu, in person or by its attorneys, shall file a
written appearance, stating its intention to appear on the date fixed
for the hearing and present evidence on the issues specified in this
Hearing Designation Order. Such written appearance shall be filed
within twenty (20) days of the mailing of this Order pursuant to
Paragraph 31 below. If Anuvu fails to file an appearance within the
time specified, it shall, unless good cause for such failure is shown,
forfeit its hearing rights.
30. It is further ordered that the Chief, Enforcement Bureau, shall
be made a party to this proceeding without the need to file a written
appearance.
31. It is further ordered that a copy of this Hearing Designation
Order shall be sent, via Certified Mail--Return Receipt Requested to:
Anuvu Licensing Holdings, LLC, c/o David S. Keir, Lerman Senter PLLC,
2001 L Street NW, Suite 400, Washington, DC 20036.
32. It is further ordered that a copy of each document filed in
this proceeding subsequent to the date of adoption of this Hearing
Designation Order shall be served on the counsel of record appearing on
behalf of the Chief, Enforcement Bureau. Parties may inquire as to the
identity of such counsel by calling the Investigations & Hearings
Division of the Enforcement Bureau at (202) 418-1420. Electronic
service on counsel of record for the Enforcement Bureau shall be made
using the following email address: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#5c191e14393d2e35323b2f1c3a3f3f723b332a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e0a5a2a8858192898e8793a0868383ce878f96">[email protected]</span></a>.
33. It is further ordered that this Hearing Designation Order or a
summary thereof shall be published at the earliest practicable date in
the Federal Register.
Federal Communications Commission.
Amy Brett,
Chief of Staff, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau.
[FR Doc. 2025-13170 Filed 7-14-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on July 15, 2025.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.