Bendix Aviation Corporation, Bendix Radio Division v. Federal Communications Commission, Aeronautical Radio, Inc., and Air Transport Association of America, Intervenors. Aeronautical Radio, Inc., a Corporation v. United States of America, Federal Communications Commission

272 F.2d 533, 106 U.S. App. D.C. 304, 1959 U.S. App. LEXIS 4998
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedNovember 13, 1959
Docket14693
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 272 F.2d 533 (Bendix Aviation Corporation, Bendix Radio Division v. Federal Communications Commission, Aeronautical Radio, Inc., and Air Transport Association of America, Intervenors. Aeronautical Radio, Inc., a Corporation v. United States of America, Federal Communications Commission) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bendix Aviation Corporation, Bendix Radio Division v. Federal Communications Commission, Aeronautical Radio, Inc., and Air Transport Association of America, Intervenors. Aeronautical Radio, Inc., a Corporation v. United States of America, Federal Communications Commission, 272 F.2d 533, 106 U.S. App. D.C. 304, 1959 U.S. App. LEXIS 4998 (D.C. Cir. 1959).

Opinion

272 F.2d 533

106 U.S.App.D.C. 304, 32 P.U.R.3d 435

BENDIX AVIATION CORPORATION, BENDIX RADIO DIVISION, Appellant,
v.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, Appellee, Aeronautical
Radio, Inc., and Air Transport Association of
America, Intervenors.
AERONAUTICAL RADIO, INC., a corporation, et al., Petitioners,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Federal Communications Commission,
Respondents.

Nos. 14650, 14693.

United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit.

Argued May 25, 1959.
Decided Nov. 13, 1959.

Mr. Daryal A. Myse, Washington, D.C., for appellant in No. 14650.

Mr. Joseph DuCoeur, Washington, D.C., with whom Messrs. Donald C. Beelar and John E. Stephen, Washington, D.C., were on the brief, for petitioners in No. 14693.

Mr. Max D. Paglin, Asst. General Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, with whom Mr. John L. Fitzgerald, General Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, and Mrs. Ruth V. Reel, Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, were on the brief, for appellee in No. 14650 and respondent Federal Communications Commission in No. 14693. Mr. John Conlin, Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, also entered an appearance for appellee in No. 14650 and respondent Federal Communications Commission in No. 14693. Mr. Richard A. Solomon, Attorney, Department of Justice, with whom Mr. Henry Geller, Attorney, Department of Justice, was on the brief, for respondent, United States of America, in No. 14693. Mr. Daniel M. Friedman, Attorney, Department of Justice, also entered an appearance for respondent, United States of America, in No. 14693.

Mr. Donald C. Beelar, Washington, D.C., with whom Messrs. Joseph DuCoeur and John E. Stephen, Washington, D.C., were on the brief, for intervenors in No. 14650.

Before WASHINGTON, DANAHER and BURGER, Circuit Judges.

DANAHER, Circuit Judge.

The Commission on April 16, 1958, adopted without prior notice, and on April 18, 1958, released, its Memorandum Opinion and Order1 effecting immediate changes in its Rules. Many bands of frequencies were reassigned, some to be reserved exclusively for Government use, some exclusively for non-Government use and others on a shared basis. We are here concerned with two such bands, one involving frequencies in the 420-450 Mc band, and the other touching frequencies in the 8500-9000 Mc band. We will discuss only so much of the problem presented and the questions involved as we deem basic and essential to our conclusions.

Bendix Aviation Corporation (herein Bendix) on May 9, 1958, sought authorization for experimental use of the 430 Mc frequency in two of its aircraft for the development of an airborne aircraft collision avoidance system. Its petition was dismissed and reconsideration was denied. Bendix appealed2 and here challenges the Commission's action in case No. 14650.

Air Transport Association of America and Aeronautical Radio, Inc. (herein ARINC/ATA) filed a pleading in support of the Bendix application. These parties, Bendix and others before the Commission had sought reconsideration of the Commission's April 16, 1958 Order, but all reconsideration was denied by the Commission's Order released July 31, 1958.3 In case No. 14693 ARINC and ATA insist that the Commission's termination of the 8500-9000 Mc band for use in radionavigation with its consequent availability to exclusive use by the Government for 'radiopositioning'4 is invalid. By our order of October 16, 1958, these cases were consolidated.

The restrictions in the use of the spectrum were initiated by a request from the Office of Defense Mobilization (ODM)5 acting, as the Commission said, in behalf of the Executive Branch of the Government. The representations submitted by ODM bore a security classification and the material has not been made public pursuant to Executive Order 105016 and Section 4(j) of the Communications Act7 which in pertinent part reads: 'The Commission is authorized to withhold publication of records or proceedings containing secret information affecting the national defense.'

The Commission based its action on representations by ODM that the 'reallocation of frequency bands for Government use are stated to be essential to fill radio-positioning requirements which have increased significantly in recent years due to the international political climate and the advent of the 'space age"; 'that the requirements in question cannot be accommodated in frequency bands presently allocated for Government use'; and that redesignation of bands for rxclusive use by Government services must be made 'at this time.' Accordingly, because of the urgency and nature of the Government's requirements and 'because of the vital national defense considerations involved,' the Commission made its public interest determination that its Rules be amended immediately to permit the orderly satisfaction of national defense requirements. The Commission further found that in view of such necessities and the vital national defense factors which it concluded were here compellingly involved, it was impracticable and contrary to the public interest to comply with the public notice requirements of Section 4 of the Administrative Procedure Act.8

Appellant and petitioners alike have attacked the Commission's failure to comply with the public notice provisions of the section.

No. 14650.

Some three weeks after the Commission had ordered the denial of non-Government access to the 420-450 Mc band, Bendix applied for experimental use of the 430 Mc frequency to develop a device for the prevention of mid-air collisions between aircraft. That such airborne electronic equipment is highly necessary may be assumed, especially where so many competent authorities, Government representatives and industry spokesmen alike, seem to have united in their efforts to devise a system to reduce the collision hazards which are a matter of common knowledge. The Commission also was clearly cognizant of the public interest character of the Bendix objective. In issue is the determination by the Commission that the Government need is paramount and vitally transcends non-Government use of the frequencies here involved, even assuming the very substantial public interest in and need for an airborne collision avoidance system. That determination is challenged on several grounds.

Bendix claims that under 47 U.S.C.A. 309 it was entitled either to a grant or to a hearing. But when the Bendix application was filed, the frequency of 430 Mc had already been withdrawn from the field of non-Government use except as the Commission authorized temporary use of the frequency until February 15, 1963, for radio altimeters9 and for amateur service.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Southwestern Cable Co. v. United States
378 F.2d 118 (Ninth Circuit, 1967)
Pauling v. McElroy
278 F.2d 252 (D.C. Circuit, 1960)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
272 F.2d 533, 106 U.S. App. D.C. 304, 1959 U.S. App. LEXIS 4998, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bendix-aviation-corporation-bendix-radio-division-v-federal-cadc-1959.