[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 33 (Thursday, February 17, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-3771]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: February 17, 1994]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------


FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 21

[CC Docket No. 92-297, FCC 94-12]

 

Establishing Rules and Policies for ``Local Multipoint 
Distribution Service''

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Second notice of proposed rulemaking; response to comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document addresses comments filed in response to the 
Commission's proposal to redesignate the 28 GHz frequency band (27.5-
29.5 GHz) from terrestrial point-to-point services, to terrestrial 
point-to-multipoint services. In this action, the Commission modifies 
its prior proposal. In order to develop regulations for the use of the 
28 GHz band that optimize the public interest benefits to the Nation, 
the Commission is issuing concurrently with this document a public 
notice requesting comments regarding the establishment of a Negotiated 
Rulemaking Committee (NRMC). The NRMC, if established, will develop 
technical regulations reflecting a consensus determination whether 
proposed terrestrial and satellite uses can share, on a co-frequency 
and co-coverage basis, the 28 GHz band. In the event that sharing is 
not possible for some of the proposed uses of the 28 GHz band, parties 
will be requested to provide detailed analyses of the costs and 
benefits of the various choices available to the Commission for the use 
of this frequency band. All other issues pertaining to establishment of 
LMDS will await development of frequency coordination and sharing 
criteria for space and terrestrial services and technical parameters 
for the service.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Susan Magnotti, Common Carrier Bureau, Domestic Facilities Division, 
(202) 634-1773.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Second Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket 92-297, adopted 
January 19, 1994, and released February 14, 1994.
    The complete text of the Second Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is 
available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in 
the FCC Reference Center (Room 230), 1919 M Street, NW., Washington, 
DC, and also may be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, 
International Transcription Services, at (202) 857-3800, 1919 M Street, 
NW., room 246, Washington, DC 20554.

Synopsis of Second Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    In the NPRM, 58 FR 6400 (January 28, 1993), the Commission 
considered three petitions for rulemaking proposing a redesignation of 
the 28 GHZ band. That band currently is designated for fixed point-to-
point and fixed satellite service use. It found that redesignation of 
the point-to-point and fixed satellite service use. It found that 
redesignation of the point-to-point use of the band to point-to-
multipoint use could stimulate greater use of a band that largely has 
lain fallow. However, the Commission asked for comment from satellite 
entities regarding the effect of redesignation on any proposed fixed 
satellite use of the band.
    As requested by the petitions for rulemaking from Suite 12 and 
Video/Phone, the Commission proposed that the 28 GHz band initially be 
licensed to two 1000 MHz blocks to two different carriers. Since it 
appeared that video service initially would be the primary service 
offered in LMDS, it proposed to divide each of the 1000 MHz bands into 
50 channels of 20 MHz each. It also proposed allowing licensees to 
provide a wide variety of other services.
    The Commission sought comment on whether other assignment schemes 
might better meet its objectives. It gave one example of a different 
assignment scheme, i.e., four blocks, two of which would have the 
capacity to carry 34 video channels, and two of which could be used for 
smaller video systems or telecommunications systems.
    Finally, the Commission requested comment on whether a separate 
assignment would be specifically required to accommodate the proposed 
satellite service applications in the Ka-band, or whether adequate 
coordination and sharing criteria could be developed to permit both 
terrestrial and fixed satellite services to operate compatibly in the 
band. It noted that the multicell multipoint configurations in the 
Suite 12 proposal envisioned a wide area distribution of services that 
might make frequency sharing with other services impossible.
    Comments to the Commission's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
indicated that the majority of interested parties support the 
Commission's finding of widespread interest in LMDS. However, satellite 
entities argued in opposition to LMDS, saying that such operations 
would cause unacceptable interference into fixed satellite services, 
including feeder links supporting mobile satellite service systems.
    The Commission stated that its preference is to accommodate all 
potential users of the 28 GHz band, both terrestrial and satellite. 
This outcome would be in keeping with the Commission's responsibilities 
under Sections 1 and 7 of the Communications Act and would provide 
consumers with the maximum number of service choices to meet their 
needs.
    Section 1 mandates that the Commission ``make available, so far as 
possible, to all the people of the United States a rapid, efficient, 
Nation-wide, and world-wide wire and radio communications service with 
adequate facilities at reasonable charges * * *''. 47 U.S.C. 151. 
Congress also requires the Commission, through Section 7, 47 U.S.C. 
157(a), to ``encourage the provision of new technologies and services 
to the public.'' So important is this policy, Congress has enjoined 
that ``[a]ny person or party (other than the Commission) who opposes a 
new technology or service * * * shall have the burden to demonstrate 
that such proposal is inconsistent with the public interest.'' It has 
been the Commission's experience, in the nearly sixty years since the 
Communications Act was enacted, that accommodating new technology and 
service proposals serves these objectives. The Commission stated that 
in its view, making the 28 GHz band available to all potential service 
providers would allow consumers to determine the best use of this 
spectrum. Accommodating all proposals would result in the availability 
of maximum communications services possible at the lowest consumer 
prices possible.
    The Commission further stated that coordination issues involved in 
allowing all interested parties to use the 28 GHz band are highly 
technical, and their solutions depend upon the specific system design 
of various proposals to use the 28 GHz band. Moreover, these system 
designs and the supporting technologies are still in the developmental 
stage and the course of their development could be influenced by our 
decisions in this proceeding. The Commission believes that the best way 
to resolve the issues discussed here would be to establish an advisory 
committee to negotiate proposed regulations to govern this band. Issued 
concurrently with this Second Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is a Public 
Notice requesting comments on the use of a Negotiated Rulemaking 
Process in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. 
App. 2, and the Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1990, Public Law 101-648, 
November 28, 1990.
    In spite of parties' best efforts, sharing may not be possible for 
all proposed uses. The technology required to permit sharing may not 
yet be developed, sharing efforts may result in unacceptable 
degradation of service to consumers, or sharing techniques may be 
prohibitively expensive, thus making an otherwise competitive service 
unaffordable to customers.
    The prospect that only some of the proposed services can be 
accommodated within the 28 GHz band leaves the Commission with the duty 
to choose which non-shareable services should be licensed. In order to 
make these choices, the Commission requires a record based on issues 
pertaining to the overall public interest in enabling only certain of 
the non-shareable services. Options for choosing among services 
include, but are not limited to, enforcing a particular modulation 
scheme for some or all users; segmenting the band to include as many 
services as possible with less spectrum than parties requested; 
assigning all spectrum to satellite uses; or assigning all spectrum to 
terrestrial uses.
    In the event the Negotiated Rulemaking is unsuccessful in reaching 
a consensus regarding proposed technical rules that would accommodate 
the proposals before the Commission, the Commission stated that it 
would require a record to enable it to select the best choices among 
services proposed. Assuming the Commission ultimately must select among 
service proposals for the 28 GHz band, the factors it will employ to do 
this will include:
    (a) Economic growth potential: Which solution holds the greatest 
potential for stimulating lower prices and higher demand for services, 
and in what product markets and geographic markets? Which solution 
offers competition in existing markets, and which markets? Which 
solution best promotes increased efficiencies in spectrum usage, and 
permits the greatest number of service providers to operate 
commercially viable systems? Which solution best promotes the offering 
of new, high-quality and innovative services? Which solution promises 
to create the greatest number of high-paying jobs, and how? Which 
solution offers the greatest potential for maximizing interconnection 
of U.S. telecommunications services and facilities?
    (b) Other public interest concerns that may not be readily 
calculable in economic terms: Which proposed plan appears most likely 
to make the most services, of the most valuable services, available to 
the broadest segment of the national community? What are the services, 
and to whom would they be available? Do any of the proposals promise 
needed services for unserved or underserved areas, and if so, what 
services, and to which communities would they be made available? Are 
particular services more likely to be valuable for educational, job 
training and employment applications, health care, environmental or 
public safety uses? Do any of the proposals serve our goal of 
facilitating the development of a National Information Infrastructure, 
and if so, how?
    (c) Timing: When are the services likely to become available and 
when are the benefits they promise likely to materialize? If different 
benefits are likely to be realized at different times, what are the 
relative advantages of the short-term and long-term benefits of the 
various services proposed? For example, should the Commission license a 
service that is likely to become available in one or two years, but 
outlive its usefulness in five to eight years, if doing so would 
preclude licensing a service that is likely to produce tangible 
benefits only after five years, but which benefits may be expected to 
have long-lasting impact on economic growth and other public interest 
concerns? What are the likely opportunity costs of not licensing the 
particular service for operation in this band? Are there any 
contingencies that would affect the likely offering of the proposed 
services in a timely manner, such as market entry barriers? The 
relative efficiency of spectrum use and reuse capability among service 
providers may also be a factor entering into any final decision.
    The proposed standards require quantification on the record in 
order for the Commission to make decisions based on these factors. To 
that end, it requests that commenters provide specific, detailed 
information that would permit the Commission to base a decision on the 
public interest impact of various options. In particular, the 
Commission requires precise data on the exact nature of services 
proposed to be offered by each applicant, what entities would provide 
the services, the business plans of the service providers, and the 
expected primary and secondary benefits of the proposed services.

Comment Dates

    Pursuant to applicable procedures set forth in Secs. 1.415 and 
1.419 of the Commission's Rules, 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.419, interested 
parties may file comments at a time to be established by public notice 
if the Commission does not establish a Committee or if a Committee is 
established but does not reach any consensus. To file formally in this 
proceeding, you must file an original and five copies of all comments, 
reply comments, and supporting comments. If you want each Commissioner 
to receive a personal copy of your comments, you must file an original 
plus nine copies. You should send comments and reply comments to the 
Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, 
DC 20554. Comments and reply comments will be available for public 
inspection during regular business hours in the Dockets Reference Room 
of the Federal Communications Commission, 1919 M Street, NW., 
Washington DC 20554.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    1. Reason for action. The purpose of this Second NPRM is to obtain 
comment on the proposed changes in fixed terrestrial and satellite 
service usage for the 28 GHz frequency band.
    2. Objectives. The objective of this proposal is to consider 
methods for appropriating spectrum in the 28 GHz band among existing 
and potential service proponents.
    3. Legal basis. The authority for this action is the Administrative 
Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553; and Sections 4(i), 4(j), 301, 303(r) of 
the Communications Act of 1934 as amended, 47 U.S.C. 145, 301, and 
303(r).
    4. Reporting, recordkeeping and other compliance requirements. 
None.
    5. Federal rules which overlap, duplicate or conflict with these 
rules. None.
    6. Description, potential impact and number of small entities 
involved. Since the first NPRM was issued, the Commission has been made 
aware of numerous small entities interested in manufacturing and/or 
providing customer services using a variety of new technologies being 
developed in the 28 GHz band. The proposals contemplated herein, to the 
extent they limit the previously proposed rule changes, could impact 
these small businesses. The impact on small entities described in the 
NPRM released January 8, 1993, applies to this action as well.
    7. Significant alternatives. Since the first NPRM was issued, the 
Commission has been made aware of other firms researching the potential 
for new technology for video and other telecommunications services in 
the 28 GHz band. In addition, satellite entities may offer alternatives 
to some services that would be offered in this band. In part due to 
these alternatives, the Commission is taking the instant action.

Ordering Clauses

    Accordingly, It is ordered That the Second Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking is hereby adopted;
    It is further ordered That a Public Notice pursuant to the 
Negotiated Rulemaking Act, 5 U.S.C. Sec. 581, SHALL BE ISSUED in 
accordance with the findings herein;
    It is further ordered That the Secretary shall mail a copy of this 
document to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy, Small Business 
Administration.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 21

    Communications common carriers, Radio.

Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 94-3771 Filed 2-16-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-M