. >> commissioner borden, brad calhoun representing t-mobile. the distinguish is that as was explained, there are basically four carriers that use f.c.c.-approved equipment under the f.c.c. license. there are other types of providers that are not in the personal wireless service space that operate equipment that's not regulated by the f.c.c.. i wasn't implying that there's some difference in safety at all. it's just the fact that one is f.c.c. approved and the other is not. and the way this tier system has been proposed is there's a distinction on how each is being treated here under the tier system. commissioner borden: i don't know if it's any clearer now. >> right now there are no f.c.c. approved carriers that can fit within tier one. >> the f.c.c. is not required to approve these facilitys? >> the point we have been advancing is that in the second court of appeals case, there was a similar scheme that was struck down because it relegated f.c.c. approved equipment to an inferior status and a more complex approval process than nonf.c.c. approv

. >> commissioner borden, brad calhoun representing t-mobile. the distinguish is that as was explained, there are basically four carriers that use f.c.c.-approved equipment under the f.c.c. license. there are other types of providers that are