ICLE Reply Comments to FCC in EchoStar Extension Request Proceeding
We submit this follow-up letter to the public notice seeking supplemental comments on VTel’s petition for reconsideration of the extension of construction deadlines for certain licenses held by EchoStar Corp.[1] As demonstrated in our prior examination of select filings, we identified evidence of technical discrepancies in the showings made by EchoStar that suggest the possibility of a larger problem. ICLE has continued to review select showings made by EchoStar in December 2024 in support of its claim to have met accelerated and enhanced construction benchmarks and has found additional anomalous data. ICLE’s findings reinforce the need for scrutiny by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to determine if DISH actually achieved 80.08% coverage of the national population and various license specific thresholds by the end of 2024.
ParkerB.com Wireless L.L.C. (ParkerB), a subsidiary of EchoStar, filed a final construction notification for WQZM393, the D Block license for the Sacramento, California PEA (PEA021).[2] In the coverage map associated with that notification, EchoStar claimed coverage in a portion of the market that is nearly completely surrounded by the San Francisco, California PEA (PEA004):
Given the absence of in-market radio sites, this figure suggests that EchoStar is providing D Block coverage from a site in the San Francisco, California area. But EchoStar does not hold the D Block license in San Francisco, California; the D Block license there is WQZM724, held by Nextel West Corp.[3]
EchoStar’s final construction notification for WQZM393 states, consistent with what ICLE noted in other filings, that the coverage shown is “Uplink Limited, value shown/plotted is for n71”—n71 being the 600 MHz band. This filing, however, is for a 600 MHz license. ICLE’s suspicions appear confirmed by EchoStar’s Sacramento filing. It appears unlikely that the license for which the notification was filed (a D Block license) has downlink coverage in the area surrounded by the San Francisco, California on three sides, because: (i) there are no Sacramento sites in the area providing coverage from within the market and (ii) EchoStar is not authorized to use the D Block frequencies in any of the areas where an out-of-market site could be located.
An analysis of EchoStar’s buildout in the San Francisco, California PEA may provide some clarity on the coverage described above. As shown in the figure below, EchoStar has claimed coverage of areas within the San Francisco, California PEA (PEA004).[4] The coverage is based on ParkerB’s 600 MHz E Block license:
This figure shows sites in the San Francisco, California PEA that EchoStar may be using to claim the 600 MHz D block coverage in the Sacramento, California PEA.
Alternatively, it could be the case that, thanks to unusual propagation characteristics, coverage is being provided from more northerly towers that fail to reach some of the intermediate territory (the empty white areas north of the southern isolated region). This does not seem likely, but it at least needs clarification with more specific data, as the submitted data is either misleading, incomplete, or erroneous. While ICLE cannot be certain of the exact problems underlying EchoStar’s filings, ICLE’s analysis of the filings raises concerns that EchoStar needs to address, and it is incumbent on the FCC to investigate.
Notably, aggregate network coverage is not sufficient for EchoStar to meet its construction requirements. The FCC’s order is license-specific, stating that “[f]or each of DISH’s 600 MHz licenses . . . [t]he final buildout deadline is accelerated to June 14, 2025, for DISH to construct and offer 5G Broadband Service to at least 75% of the population in each PEA” (emphasis added).[5] It does not state—as it could have, if the intent was otherwise—that “DISH’s aggregate 600 MHz coverage must offer 5G Broadband Service to at least 75% of the population in each PEA.”
The distinction between aggregate and license-specific coverage is not merely semantic. A coverage map may legitimately depict 600 MHz signals spilling into the target PEA from cell sites located just across the boundary. That spillover, however, is relevant only if those sites are operating under the same block authorization as the license at-issue. EchoStar cannot, for example, satisfy its G Block obligation in Sacramento by counting G Block—or any other block—signals transmitted from San Francisco, nor may it claim credit for F Block coverage in Miami that originates from Cape Coral or another adjacent market. The commission’s order requires that each individual block license reach the stipulated 75% population threshold within its home PEA; coverage furnished under a different block, even if part of EchoStar’s broader 600 MHz portfolio, is irrelevant to that determination.
Nor can Sacramento, California, be passed over as an isolated mistake. ParkerB also filed final construction notifications for WQZM244[6] and WQZM245,[7] the E and F Block licenses for the Miami, Florida PEA (PEA009). In each of the coverage maps associated with those notifications, EchoStar appears to have claimed coverage from a market adjacent to the Miami, Florida—the Cape Coral, Florida PEA (PEA065):[8]
Again, logically, EchoStar appears to be claiming E and F Block coverage from sites in an adjacent market in order to map this spillover coverage, as there are no in-market sites shown. But EchoStar does not hold either the E or F Block licenses in Cape Coral, Florida. The E Block license for Cape Coral, Florida is WQZL816, held by Nextel West Corp.,[9] and the F Block license is WRCP900, held by NewLevel LLC.[10]
Similarly, ParkerB filed a final construction notification for WQZM668, the F Block license for the Memphis, Tennessee PEA (PEA059).[11] In the coverage map associated with that notification, EchoStar claimed coverage in a portion of a small portion of the Memphis area west of the Southaven, Mississippi PEA (PEA175):
Once again, as there are no in-market sites shown within the coverage area, EchoStar has not demonstrated how it is providing F Block coverage to this area from within the Memphis, Tennessee PEA. EchoStar does not hold the F Block license in Southaven, Mississippi; the F Block license for Southaven, Mississippi is WQZR976, held by Cellular South Licenses LLC,[12] so it cannot claim coverage from the adjacent market. It is possible, again, that there are unusual characteristics of the area that allow its in-market equipment to reach that isolated section, but no other locations around it. But it is not clear from the submitted data if that is, indeed, the case. This anomaly needs explanation.
In sum, EchoStar’s construction notifications raise serious questions as to the probity of EchoStar’s population-coverage tabulations. But these filings suggest that EchoStar’s premise is flawed. In Sacramento, Miami, and Memphis, EchoStar appears to be claiming coverage that does not exist—or, at least, is exceedingly difficult to understand, given their submitted data.
Given the apparent discrepancies in its filed data, it would be reasonable for the commission to request license-specific coverage maps in a GIS-compatible format showing both the uplink and downlink coverage provided by the actual license for which it is filing. Additionally, the population information for each license should be provided in the GIS files. Finally, the public should be given an opportunity to review and comment on all of these submissions prior to acceptance by the FCC. Thank you for the opportunity to provide these supplemental comments.
In accordance with the requirements of Section 1.1206 of the Commission’s rules, a copy of this letter is being submitted to the commission’s Electronic Comment Filing System on this date.
[1] See Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Seeks Supplemental Comment on VTEL’s Petition for Reconsideration of the Extension of Construction Deadlines for Certain Licenses Held by EchoStar Corporation, Public Notice, WT Docket No. 22-212, DA 25-404 (May 12, 2025); Petition for Reconsideration of VTel Wireless, Inc., WT Docket No. 22- 212 (filed Oct. 21, 2024).
[2] 0011570829 – ParkerB.com Wireless L.L.C., FCC Uniform Licensing System, https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/ApplicationSearch/applAdmin.jsp;JSESSIONID_APPSEARCH=qxNmEvvRxn3580UXiHfM840ItmqNDDjzv9PHkjpLb_VsdhM071t7!-33173425!-122512583?applID=15400752.
[3] 600 MHz Band License – WQZM724 – Nextel West Corp., FCC Uniform Licensing System, https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/licenseMarketSum.jsp?licKey=3930692.
[4] 600 MHz Band License – WQZM319 – ParkerB.com Wireless L.L.C., FCC Uniform Licensing System, https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/ApplicationSearch/applAdmin.jsp?applID=15145057#.
[5] Applications of T-Mobile US, Inc., and Sprint Corporation For Consent To Transfer Control of Licenses and Authorizations; Applications of American H Block Wireless, DBSD Corporation, Gamma Acquisition , Manifest Wireless, ParkerB.com Wireless, Order, 35 FCC Rcd 9580, 9587 ¶ 12 (WTB 2020).
[6] 0011374722 – ParkerB.com Wireless L.L.C., FCC Uniform Licensing System, https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/ApplicationSearch/applAdmin.jsp?applID=15145162.
[7] 0011374726 – ParkerB.com Wireless L.L.C., FCC Uniform Licensing System, https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/ApplicationSearch/applAdmin.jsp?applID=15145163#.
[8] According to EchoStar’s coverage maps, there are also small spots of orange “coverage” shown across the peninsula in Tampa Bay—200 miles from Miami—raising serious questions about what EchoStar is actually counting in its showings.
[9] 600 MHz Band License – WQZL816 – Nextel West Corp., FCC Uniform Licensing System, https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/license.jsp?licKey=3929984.
[10] 600 MHz Band License – WRCP900 – NewLevel, LLC, FCC Uniform Licensing System, https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/license.jsp?licKey=4105482.
[11] 0011377494 – ParkerB.com Wireless L.L.C., FCC Uniform Licensing System, https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/ApplicationSearch/applAdmin.jsp?applID=15148548#.
[12] 600 MHz Band License – WQZR976 – Cellular South Licenses, LLC, FCC Uniform Licensing System, https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/license.jsp?licKey=3940698.