[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 72 (Friday, April 13, 2001)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19106-19132]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-9039]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 2, 27, and 73

[GN Docket No. 01-74; FCC 01-91]


Reallocation and Service Rules for the 698-746 MHz Spectrum Band 
(Television Channels 52-59)

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission (``the 
Commission'') proposes to reallocate the 698-746 MHz spectrum band, 
currently comprising television Channels 52-59. The Commission also 
proposes a co-primary allocation for the fixed, mobile, and 
broadcasting services. Further, the

[[Page 19107]]

Commission is reclaiming this spectrum for new commercial services as 
part of the Commission's transition of TV broadcasting from analog to 
digital transmission systems. The Commission also examines possible 
licensing, operating, and competitive bidding rules for wireless and 
other services in this spectrum band. Further considered are measures 
to protect the incumbent analog and digital broadcast television 
services from interference until the transition to digital television 
is complete.

DATES: Comments are due on or before May 14, 2001. Reply comments are 
due on or before June 4, 2001. Written comments by the public on the 
proposed information collections are due on or before May 14, 2001. 
Written comments must be submitted by the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) on the proposed information collection(s) on or before 
June 12, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Comments filed through the Commission's Electronic Comment 
Filing System (ECFS) can be sent as an electronic file via the Internet 
to http://www.fcc.gov/e-file/ecfs.html. Parties who choose to file 
comments by paper should send comments to the Commission's Secretary, 
Magalie Roman Salas, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications 
Commission, 445 12th Street, S.W.; TW-A325; Washington, D.C. 20554. In 
addition to filing comments with the Secretary, copies of any comments 
on the information collections contained herein should be submitted to 
Judy Boley, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, S.W., 
Room 1-C804, Washington, D.C. 20554, or via the Internet to 
[email protected], and to Edward C. Springer, OMB Desk Officer, 10236 New 
Executive Office Building, 725 17th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 
20503 or via the Internet to [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Allocation Issues: Lisa Gaisford at 
(202) 418-7280, or via the Internet at [email protected] (Office of 
Engineering and Technology); Service Rules Issues: G. William Stafford 
at (202) 418-0563; or via the Internet at [email protected] (Wireless 
Telecommunications Bureau).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking (``Notice'') in GN Docket No. 01-74, FCC 01-91, adopted 
March 16, 2001 and released March 28, 2001. The complete text of the 
document is available to the public on the Commission's Internet Home 
Page: http://www.fcc.gov (including at http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Orders/2001/fcc0191.pdf). The document is also available for 
public inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC 
Reference Information Center, 445 12th Street, S.W., Room CY-A257, 
Washington, D.C. and may be purchased from the Commission's copy 
contractor, International Transcription Services (``ITS, Inc.''), (202) 
857-3800, 445 12th Street, S.W., CY-B400, Washington, D.C. 20554. This 
Notice may contain proposed information collection(s) subject to the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (``PRA''). It has been submitted to the 
Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'') for review under the PRA. 
OMB, the general public, and other Federal agencies are invited to 
comment on the proposed information collection(s) contained in this 
proceeding.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This NPRM contains a proposed information collection. The 
Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork 
burdens, invites the general public and the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) to comment on the information collection(s) contained in 
this NPRM, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public 
Law 104-13. Public and agency comments are due at the same time as 
other comments on this NPRM; OMB notification of action is due June 12, 
2001. Comments should address: (a) Whether the proposed collection of 
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of 
the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical 
utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimates; (c) 
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information 
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of 
information on the respondents, including the use of automated 
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

Synopsis of Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    The Notice is part of the Commission's plan to reclaim the 698-746 
MHz band (``698-746 MHz band'' or ``Lower 700 MHz Band''), currently 
used for television (``TV'') Channels 52-59, for new commercial 
services as part of the transition of TV broadcasting from analog to 
digital transmission systems, consistent with the statutory directives 
enacted in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. The Notice consists of two 
parts. First, the Notice proposes to reallocate the 698-746 MHz band, 
currently used for TV Channels 52-59, from use solely for broadcast 
services to Fixed, Mobile, and Broadcast services. Second, the Notice 
proposes to adopt certain service, licensing, and competitive bidding 
rules for the 698-746 MHz band. The Notice proposes to reallocate the 
entire 48 megahertz of spectrum in the 698-746 MHz band to the fixed 
and mobile services, and retain the existing broadcast allocation. The 
Notice also seeks comment on whether the band should also be allocated 
for satellite services. This Notice also proposes to license the 698-
746 MHz commercial band under a flexible framework established in part 
27 of the Commission's rules. The Commission expects that provisions of 
part 27 will be modified to reflect the particular characteristics and 
circumstances of services offered through the use of spectrum on these 
bands. Depending on the extent and nature of provisions in the service 
rules that enable broadcast services, these modifications may also 
reference or incorporate rules in other parts of the Commission's 
rules, such as part 73 governing broadcast services. The flexible 
approach contained in the Notice will encourage new and innovative 
services and technologies in this band without significantly limiting 
the range of potential uses for this spectrum.

I. Introduction

    1. The Notice proposes to reallocate the 698-746 MHz spectrum band, 
currently comprising television (``TV'') Channels 52-59. The Commission 
is reclaiming this spectrum for new commercial services as part of the 
Commission's transition of TV broadcasting from analog to digital 
transmission systems. Digital television (``DTV'') technology is more 
spectrally efficient thus allowing the same amount of television 
service to operate in a reduced allocation, i.e., TV Channels 2-51, 
after the transition. The Notice proposes a co-primary allocation for 
the fixed, mobile, and broadcasting services for this 48 megahertz 
band. This flexible allocation will enable service providers to select 
the technology they wish to use to provide new broadband services in 
order to make the best use of this spectrum. The Notice also examines 
possible licensing, operating, and competitive bidding rules for 
wireless and other services in this spectrum band. The Notice 
anticipates that licenses will be assigned by competitive bidding 
consistent with statutory requirements.\1\ The Notice also

[[Page 19108]]

considers measures to protect the incumbent analog and digital 
broadcast television services from interference until the transition to 
digital television is complete. The Commission believes these measures 
will enable an orderly transition for broadcasters while permitting the 
introduction of new services into the band.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Balanced Budget Act of 1997, Public Law 105-33, 111 
Stat. 251 at 3003 (1997) (adding new section 309(j)(14) to the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended) (``BBA 97'') 3007 
(uncodified, reproduced at 47 U.S.C. 309(j) note 3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Background

    2. Section 309(j)(14) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended 
(``Communications Act'') requires the Commission to assign spectrum 
recaptured from broadcast television as a result of the transition from 
analog to digital transmission systems by competitive bidding by 
September 30, 2002.\2\ The statute requires that analog broadcasters 
cease operation on the recaptured spectrum in 2006 unless one or more 
of the four largest network stations or affiliates are not broadcasting 
in digital, digital-to-analog converter technology is not generally 
available, or 15% or more television households are not receiving a 
digital signal. Thus, while the end of the transition is targeted for 
2006, and may extend beyond that date, the Commission must reallocate 
spectrum and assign commercial licenses in the encumbered television 
spectrum by September 30, 2002. New licensees may operate in the band 
prior to the end of the transition to the extent they do not cause 
interference to existing analog and digital broadcasters, see DTV Sixth 
Report and Order, 62 FR 26684, May 14, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See id. at 3003 and 3007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Under section 309(j)(3) of the Communications Act, in developing 
a competitive bidding methodology and specifying the characteristics of 
licenses to be assigned by auction, the Commission are required to 
promote a number of objectives, including the development and rapid 
deployment of new technologies, products, and services for the benefit 
of the public, the promotion of economic opportunity and competition, 
the recovery of a portion of the value of the spectrum made available 
for commercial use, and the efficient and intensive use of the 
spectrum, in a manner that provides adequate time for interested 
parties to develop their business plans.\3\ The Commission's 
regulations shall prescribe area designations and bandwidth assignments 
that promote (a) equitable distribution of licenses and services among 
geographic areas, (b) economic opportunity for a wide variety of 
applicants, including small businesses, rural telephone companies, and 
businesses owned by members of minority groups and women, and (c) 
investment in and rapid deployment of new technologies and services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See 47 U.S.C. 309(j)(3) (A)-(E).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. Section 303(y)(2) of the Communications Act authorizes the 
Commission to allocate spectrum to provide flexibility of use if 
certain conditions are met. Specifically, the Commission must make 
affirmative findings that such flexibility: (1) Is consistent with 
international agreements; (2) would be in the public interest; (3) 
would not deter investment in communications services and systems, or 
technology development; and (4) would not result in harmful 
interference among users.
    5. Pursuant to legislative mandates, the Commission is requiring 
that the broadcast television service convert from the existing analog 
television transmission system to a new digital television system that 
will allow broadcasters the flexibility to provide a variety of new 
services, including high definition television service, multicasting of 
multiple programs, data services and other enhancements. Broadcasters 
have been provided a second channel to operate their DTV service during 
the transition from analog to digital service, see generally DTV Second 
MO&O of the Fifth and Sixth Report and Orders, 64 FR 4322, January 28, 
1999; DTV MO&O of the Sixth Report and Order, 63 FR 13546, March 20, 
1998; DTV MO&O of the Fifth Report and Order, 63 FR 15774, April 1, 
1998; DTV Sixth Report and Order, DTV Fifth Report and Order, 62 FR 
26966, May 16, 1997 (collectively DTV Proceeding). At the end of this 
transition, analog service will cease and one of each broadcaster's two 
channels will be recovered. Because the DTV transmission system is more 
spectrally efficient than the analog system, less spectrum will be 
needed for broadcast television service after the transition. A portion 
of the TV spectrum, i.e., Channels 52-69, is therefore being recovered 
for new uses. Spectrum currently allocated to Channels 2-51 will remain 
``core'' television broadcast spectrum. Analog services on all TV 
Channels will cease operations at the end of the transition. Digital 
services on out-of-core stations will be relocated into the core 
spectrum (Channels 2-51).
    6. The Commission is addressing the spectrum reclamation in two 
parts--Channels 60-69 (``Upper 700 MHz Band'' or ``746-806 MHz band'') 
and Channels 52-59 (``Lower 700 MHz Band'' or ``698-746 MHz band'') 
primarily as a result of unique statutory requirements and varying 
degrees of incumbency. In ET Docket 97-157, the Commission reallocated 
the 746-806 MHz (TV Channels 60-69) band for new services. As required 
by statute, it reallocated 24 megahertz for public safety and 36 
megahertz for new commercial services. The reallocation of the 698-746 
MHz band (TV Channels 52-59) is addressed in this proceeding.

III. Discussion

    7. The Commission's framework for consideration of both allocation 
and service rules for the Lower 700 MHz Band is modeled on the approach 
taken in the Upper 700 MHz proceeding, see Upper 700 MHz Third Report 
and Order, 66 FR 10204, February 14, 2001; Upper 700 MHz Second MO&O, 
66 FR 9035, February 6, 2001; Upper 700 MHz MO&O and FNPRM, 65 FR 
42960, July 12, 2000; Upper 700 MHz Second Report and Order, 65 FR 
17594, April 4, 2000; Upper 700 MHz First Report and Order, 65 FR 3139, 
January 20, 2000, corrected by 65 FR 12483, March 9, 2000; Upper 700 
MHz NPRM, 64 FR 36642, July 7, 1999 (collectively Upper 700 MHz 
proceeding). The Commission seeks comment generally on whether the 
considerations that the Commission found to be appropriate for the 746-
806 MHz bands are equally applicable to the Lower 700 MHz spectrum once 
it has been reallocated, or whether, given the differences in the two 
bands, the Commission should apply other approaches.

A. Allocation Proceeding

1. Reallocation
    8. The Commission had anticipated, given the degree of incumbency, 
that this band likely would remain principally a television band until 
the end of the digital transition. However, given the statutory 
requirement to auction this spectrum several years in advance of the 
end of the transition, the Commission seeks comment generally on the 
reallocation plans and service rules necessary to license the spectrum 
consistent with the Congressional mandate. The Commission also seeks 
comment on whether the Commission should consider ways to facilitate 
the DTV transition and the availability of this band to auction bidders 
sooner. In making proposals, commenters should address consistency with 
the statutory requirements of section 309(j)(14) and other relevant 
provisions of the Communications Act.

[[Page 19109]]

a. Current Allocation
    9. Domestically, the 698-746 MHz band is currently allocated on a 
primary basis to non-government broadcasting, i.e., TV Channels 52-59, 
each having a bandwidth of six megahertz. TV broadcast services are 
also permitted to use TV subcarrier frequencies, and more generally the 
TV channel, on a secondary basis for other broadcast-related (e.g., 
datacasting) and non-broadcast purposes.\4\ Further, the band is 
allocated to the fixed service for subscription television operations 
in accordance with part 73 of the Commission's rules.\5\ 
Internationally, the band is allocated worldwide on a primary basis to 
the broadcasting service. The band is also allocated to the fixed and 
mobile services in Region 2 (which includes the United States) on a 
secondary basis and in Region 3 on a co-primary basis. A footnote to 
the International Table of Frequency Allocations elevates the 
allocation to the fixed and mobile services to primary status in the 
United States, Mexico, and several other Region 2 countries, but has 
not been implemented domestically.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 47 CFR 2.106 note NG128.
    \5\ See id. at. 2.106 note NG149.
    \6\ Id. at 2.106 note S5.293.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    10. In its 1999 Spectrum Reallocation Policy Statement, the 
Commission noted that it planned to consider reallocating the 698-746 
MHz band for Fixed, Mobile and new Broadcast services for commercial 
uses following the same approach it adopted for reallocating the 36 
megahertz at 746-764 MHz and 776-794 MHz, see Spectrum Reallocation 
Policy Statement, FCC 99-354, 14 FCC Rcd 19868, November 22, 1999 (not 
published in Federal Register). In the Commission's recently adopted 3G 
Notice on Advanced Fixed and Mobile Services, the 698-746 MHz band was 
identified as a possible candidate for third-generation (``3G'') mobile 
services, see 3G Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 66 FR 7438, January 23, 
2001 (3G Notice). Further, a resolution adopted at World 
Radiocommunication Conference (``WRC'')-2000 recognized that some 
administrations may use the 698-746 MHz band for 3G services.
b. Fixed, Mobile, and Broadcast Allocation
    11. Consistent with the Commission's Spectrum Reallocation Policy 
Statement, the allocation for the 746-806 MHz band, and U.S. positions 
taken at WRC, the Commission proposes to reallocate the entire 48 
megahertz of spectrum in the 698-746 MHz band to the fixed and mobile 
services, and retain the existing broadcast allocation. This allocation 
will support a family of services, including next generation broadband 
operations, and permit the maximum diversity in service offerings and 
the broadest licensee discretion, consistent with international 
allocations. The Commission requests comment on whether this broad 
allocation is appropriate, or whether some other allocation would 
better serve the public interest. The Commission also seeks comment 
with respect to each of the findings required under section 303(y) of 
the Communications Act with respect to the Commission's proposed 
allocation of the 698-746 MHz band.
c. Special Considerations for Broadcast Allocation
    12. The DTV transition plan anticipates that broadcasters will 
vacate this spectrum by the end of the DTV transition period. For this 
reason, the Commission would distinguish between broadcasters 
authorized pursuant to the current allocation and service rules from 
new licensees who may provide broadcasting service. New licensees will 
be subject to the rules the Commission will adopt for the regulation of 
the reallocated spectrum. Broadcasters authorized under the current 
rules are entitled to protection or accommodation from new licensees 
and will have to vacate this spectrum by the end of the transition 
period.
    13. At the end of the transition, television broadcasting will 
remain adjacent to the 698-746 MHz band on channel 51. While the 
Commission will consider issues such as field strength limitations in 
the Commission's service rules, the Commission seeks comment on whether 
restrictions to the allocation are necessary to protect adjacent 
channel broadcast television operations. Comments should address 
whether fixed services may be more successful than mobile services in 
structuring their systems to avoid interference with incumbent 
broadcasters, and thus be able to use the spectrum more efficiently. 
The Commission is also concerned about the effects of adjacent channel 
television broadcasting on low power mobile operations in the 698-746 
MHz band, for example mobile receive antennas. The Commission seeks 
comment on whether the Commission should adjust the Commission's 
allocation to perhaps minimize the presence of systems with low 
immunity to high-powered signals.
d. Low Power Television Service
    14. The low power television (``LPTV'') service currently operates 
on a secondary basis in the 698-746 MHz band. Thus, LPTV stations are 
allowed to operate to the extent they do not interfere with full power 
stations. In the Commission's DTV Proceeding, the Commission determined 
that there is insufficient spectrum to preserve all existing LPTV and 
TV translator stations, and decided that LPTV and TV translator 
stations will retain their secondary allocation status. In the 746-806 
MHz proceeding, the Commission permitted continuing operations on a 
secondary basis for existing low power services in that band. The 
Commission believes that low power television should be permitted to 
continue to operate on the 698-746 MHz band on a secondary basis. 
Accordingly, the Commission proposed that LPTV and TV translator 
stations not be permitted to cause harmful interference to stations of 
primary services, including new licensees in Channels 52-59, and cannot 
claim protection from harmful interference from stations of primary 
services, including new licensees in Channels 52-59. However, as set 
forth in the DTV Sixth Report and Order, the Commission proposed that 
LPTV and TV translator operations will not be required to alter or 
cease their operations until they actually cause interference to a DTV 
station or new service provider's operations in the 698-746 MHz band. 
Further, as the Commission did in the 746-806 MHz band, the Commission 
proposed that LPTV stations be permitted to negotiate interference 
agreements with new service providers, see Upper 700 MHz Reallocation 
Order, 63 FR 63798, November 17, 1998. Although the Commission 
recognized that LPTV and TV translator stations retain this secondary 
status, the Commission seeks comment on these proposals and any 
additional considerations that might mitigate the impact on low power 
operations on Channels 52-59 during the transition period.
e. Satellite Services
    15. While the Commission is not making a specific proposal at this 
time concerning an allocation in this band for satellite services, the 
Commission seeks comment on this issue. The Commission seeks comment on 
whether satellite operations are technically feasible in this band. In 
addition, while the BBA 97 requires that the Commission assign spectrum 
reclaimed from broadcasters as a result of the digital transition by 
competitive bidding, subsequently-enacted legislation restricts the use 
of competitive bidding to license spectrum used for the provision of 
certain

[[Page 19110]]

international satellite services.\7\ The Commission seeks comment on 
whether these statutory provisions would affect the Commission's 
ability to allocate spectrum for flexible uses that would include the 
ability to deploy satellite services, subject to appropriate 
interference and other technical limitations, Cf. 3650-3700 MHz First 
Report and Order, 65 FR 69612, November 17, 2000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Open-Market Reorganization for the Betterment of 
International Telecommunications Act, Public Law 106-180, 114 Stat. 
48 (2000) (``ORBIT Act'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Transition Issues
a. Incumbent Broadcasters
    16. Incumbent broadcasters may remain on the 698-746 MHz band until 
the end of the digital transition targeted for 2006. The significant 
degree of incumbency will pose considerable challenges to the provision 
of viable new commercial services prior to the end of the transition. 
The Commission seeks comment generally on how the Commission can 
further the viability of auction of this spectrum consistent with the 
Commission's statutory obligations and sound principles of spectrum 
management.
(i) Analog Stations
    17. Currently, there are 89 licensed full service NTSC analog 
stations and 12 approved analog construction permits on the 698-746 MHz 
band. For the 746-806 MHz band, the Commission concluded that stations 
for which a construction permit has been granted are sufficiently far 
enough along the licensing process that they should be treated the same 
as operating TV stations and receive protection from new service 
providers during the DTV transition period. The Commission has 
established a three-year construction requirement to ensure that 
holders of construction permits, both for new facilities and 
modification of existing facilities, progress in construction.\8\ The 
Commission proposes to treat construction permits in the 698-746 MHz 
band in the same manner the Commission adopted in the 746-806 MHz band 
and seeks comment on this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 47 CFR 73.3598.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    18. In the DTV Sixth Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 61 FR 
43209, August 21, 1996, in order to accommodate parties who were in the 
process of preparing applications, the Commission established a final 
opportunity for the filing of new applications for analog stations for 
vacant allotments. Applications could be submitted during this filing 
window for (1) amendments (other than channel changes) to pending 
applications for new full-service NTSC television stations on Channel 
2-59, (2) petitions for rule making seeking a new channel below Channel 
60 for those applicants with pending applications for new full-service 
NTSC television stations on Channels 60-69, (3) petitions for rule 
making seeking a new channel below channel 60 for those applicants with 
pending applications for new full-service NTSC television stations on 
Channels 2-59 at locations inside of the ``TV Freeze Areas'' and (4) 
amendments to pending rule making petitions to amend the TV Table of 
Allotments to add NTSC television allotments, see Analog TV Filing 
Public Notice (DA 99-2605), 64 FR 67267, December 1, 1999 (Analog TV 
Filing Public Notice).
    19. There are pending requests for approximately 57 new NTSC 
stations in this band, either with applications or allotment petitions 
originally filed during the filing windows established by the 
Commission. Some of the requests have been pending on these channels 
since they were filed, while others were amended to specify a channel 
in this band under procedures announced in the Analog TV Filing Public 
Notice. Previously, those new station proposals had been for stations 
on Channels 2 through 59 at locations where they would have conflicted 
with one or more DTV allotments or for use of TV Channels 60 through 
69. The Commission recognizes that those persons with pending 
applications and/or petitions for new full-service NTSC television 
stations on those channels had already invested time, money and effort 
into their applications and petitions. Therefore, the Commission stated 
that it would not summarily terminate the pending applications and 
petitions, and it would, at a later date, provide applicants and 
petitioners an opportunity to amend their applications and petitions, 
if possible, to a channel below Channel 60.
    20. The Commission recognizes that continuing to process these 
applications could result in greater incumbency on the 698-746 MHz 
band, which may make new service operations more difficult. This band 
was originally intended to remain principally a television band until 
the end of the transition and the Commission recognizes that it may be 
inequitable not to process these applications, or a subset of them. In 
addition, given the significant number of analog and DTV incumbents 
that already exist on this band, the impact on the provision of new 
services may be marginal. Therefore, while the Commission is not 
directing the Mass Media Bureau to suspend processing of applications 
(with the exception of stations on Channel 59) for new analog stations, 
the Commission seeks comment on the Commission's ultimate treatment of 
the remaining pending applications. For example, the Commission seeks 
comment on whether there are stronger equities for continuing to 
process any particular subcategory of these pending applications. In 
addition, if such applications are granted, the Commission seeks 
comment on whether the Commission could require these stations to 
transition to available frequencies below 698 MHz by a date certain, 
i.e., 2006, to ensure that these stations do not encumber the provision 
of new services. The Commission particularly seeks comment on whether 
such a requirement would be consistent with the Commission's statutory 
requirements in section 309(j)(14) of the Communications Act. The 
Commission also seeks comment on whether these applicants (or a 
particular subset thereof) should be allowed to amend their pending 
applications through a channel allotment rule making petition to 
specify a new digital channel in the core that may become available 
later. With regard to applications pending for stations on Channel 59, 
the Commission believes that granting more analog station licenses 
could impact the licensing of new services in the Upper 700 MHz Band 
due to adjacent channel interference problems. Therefore, for the 
pendency of this rulemaking proceeding, the Commission directs the Mass 
Media Bureau to suspend processing of applications and channel 
allotment petitions for new analog stations on Channel 59, but to allow 
limited amendments to specify another channel, if available.
(ii) Digital Stations
    21. Because the Commission was unable to accommodate a second 
digital channel for all broadcasters within the ``core'' broadcast 
spectrum, there are a substantial number of digital channels on 
Channels 52-59 as well. While the planning for the DTV Table of 
Allotments sought to minimize use of out-of-core channels, it was 
necessary to make allotments outside this range, particularly in the 
most congested areas of the country. Thus, there are 165 DTV 
assignments on Channels 52-59 (includes licenses, construction permits, 
and pending applications). Also pending, are four DTV allotment 
petitions filed by entities that originally proposed NTSC operations. 
While there are roughly the same number of analog

[[Page 19111]]

stations on Channels 52-59 as there are on Channels 60-69, there are 
significantly more digital television incumbents. In particular, there 
are only 20 digital assignments on Channels 60-69 compared to the 165 
assignments on Channels 52-59 and this number may increase.
(iii) Low Power Stations
    22. There are currently 835 licenses and 244 construction permits 
for low power television operations on Channels 52-59. In addition, 
there are 607 applications pending for new low power stations. Many of 
these pending applications involve requests for replacement channels by 
low power stations displaced by DTV stations or seeking to vacate the 
use of TV Channels 60-69 (746-806 MHz). Section 3004 of the BBA 97 
states that anyone holding a television broadcast license in the 746-
806 MHz band ``may not operate at that frequency after the date on 
which the digital television transition period terminates, as 
determined by the Commission.'' In the Commission's reallocation 
proceeding for Channels 60-69, the Commission found that this provision 
leaves us no latitude in clearing LPTV and TV translator stations from 
the band at the end of the DTV transition period. Throughout the DTV 
and related proceedings, the Commission has recognized that the DTV 
transition and the reallocation of spectrum to other services will have 
a significant impact on LPTV and TV translators. Further, the 
Commission has recognized that LPTV operators offer important services 
to specialized and minority audiences, foreign language communities, 
and rural areas. In this regard, the Commission adopted a number of 
rule changes in the DTV Proceeding to mitigate the impact on these 
stations. The Commission seeks comment on whether there are additional 
measures the Commission should consider for LPTV in the 698-746 MHz 
band.

                                                          Summary of Channels 52-59 Incumbents
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Applicants &
                                                   Licenses       Construction      allotment          Total                      New \9\
                                                                    permits         petitions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NTSC.........................................               89               12               57              158  Not Permitted.
DTV..........................................               17               95               53              165  Not Permitted.
LPTV.........................................              835              244              607            1,686  Permitted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Interference Protection for Television Services
    23. In the DTV Proceeding, the Commission stated that all existing 
analog TV and new DTV stations in the 698-746 MHz band would be fully 
protected during the DTV transition period. Thus, it will be necessary 
for licensees in the reallocated spectrum to protect both analog TV and 
DTV stations in the 698-746 MHz band from interference. If any 
additional NTSC licenses or construction permits or DTV full service 
allotments are made as a result of pending petitions, they would be 
afforded full protection during the DTV transition period.
(i) Protection of Analog Stations
    24. For the 746-806 MHz (Channels 60-69) band, the Commission 
adopted a methodology that specifies minimum separation distances based 
on the various heights and powers of land mobile stations to prevent 
harmful interference to incumbent analog television operations from new 
service providers. This methodology has been successfully used in 
existing land mobile-broadcasting sharing arrangements in the 470-512 
MHz band. The Commission used a 40 dB desired-to-undesired (D/U) signal 
ratio for calculating the co-channel geographic separation 
requirements, see Public Safety Service Rule First Report and Order and 
Third Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 63 FR 58645, November 2, 1998, 63 
FR 58685, November 2, 1998 (Public Safety Service Rule Order). The 
Commission found this to be a reasonable value that will provide 
sufficient protection for TV stations, as prescribed by the BBA 97. Co-
channel land mobile base station transmitters will be limited to a 
maximum signal strength at the assumed TV Grade B contour that is 40 dB 
below the 64 dBu Grade B contour signal strength value, or 24 dBu. The 
Commission adopted a 0 dB D/U signal ratio for adjacent channel 
operations. Adjacent channel land mobile transmitters are thus limited 
to a maximum signal which can equal the TV Grade B signal of 64 dBu at 
the TV station assumed Grade B contour of 88.5 km (55 miles). A typical 
TV receiver's adjacent channel rejection is at least 10-20 dB, which 
will further safeguard TV from land mobile interference. The analog TV 
protections adopted in the 746-806 MHz reallocation proceeding were 
based on the need to balance protection for existing broadcasting 
services, while making this spectrum viable for new services, including 
public safety. The Commission seeks comment on whether the Commission 
should employ the same method for protecting analog TV stations in the 
698-746 MHz band.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Commission ended filing opportunities for new NTSC 
stations effective September 20, 1996. Amendments to certain of 
these applications and allotment petitions to change channels, filed 
prior to the freeze were accepted until July 15, 2000. All requests 
for new DTV allotments must be filed for in-core channels. However, 
initially eligible DTV broadcasters are permitted to seek modified 
allotments, including Channels 52-59. See 47 CFR 73.622(a). Not 
included in the counts above are four petitions for NTSC 
assignments, which have requested to convert their station 
proposals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(ii) Protection of Digital Stations
    25. In the Commission's public safety proceeding, the Commission 
determined that the same signal strength limits for land mobile 
operation criteria used for protection of analog stations, i.e., 24 
dB co-channel and 64 dB adjacent channel, should also 
apply for digital stations. These field strength values correspond to 
co-channel and adjacent channel protection ratios for a DTV station at 
its 41 dB field strength service contour of 17 dB and-23 dB, 
respectively. The Commission notes that these determinations are 
consistent with the DTV Sixth Report and Order. There, the Commission 
specified a minimum geographic separation of 250 km (155 miles) for co-
channel operations between DTV stations and the city-center in the 
areas where there are existing land mobile operations. Section 
90.305(a) of the Commission's rules provides that full power land 
mobile base stations can be located up to 80.5 km (50 miles) from the 
city-center of one of the specified cities.\10\ Consequently, under the 
geographic separation standards adopted in the DTV Sixth Report and 
Order, a land

[[Page 19112]]

mobile base station could choose to locate its station as close as 
169.5 km (250 km-80.5 km), or 105 miles to a neighboring DTV station. 
At this distance, a typical land mobile base station would produce an 
interfering signal at the DTV station's 88.5 km (55 miles) equivalent 
Grade B contour corresponding to the 17 dB D/U protection ratio 
specified in the Public Safety Service Rule Order to a DTV receiver. 
Thus, the Commission's decision to require land mobile systems to 
provide signal ratios for DTV stations which will afford approximately 
the same separation distance as the Commission did for analog TV 
stations, was considered to represent a reasonable balance between the 
needs of both DTV stations and new services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See 47 CFR 90.305(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    26. With regard to this new allocation of the 698-746 MHz band, the 
Commission seeks comment on whether to adopt the same criteria for 
protection of DTV stations as the Commission used for protection of 
analog stations. The Commission is particularly interested in comments 
addressing the provisions for transmissions that may have the 
characteristics of a wide band-noise like emission. As demonstrated by 
the table in Sec. 73.623(c)(3)(ii), DTV receivers treat co-channel DTV 
signals as an increase in the noise floor of the desired signal. This 
increase in noise floor is proportional to the power received from the 
undesired station. Therefore, in order to maintain the minimum 
necessary signal-to-noise (S/N) ratio of 15.19 dB, the desired signal 
level must be increased. Section 73.623(c)(2) of the rules sets forth a 
value of 15 dB for co-channel interference for DTV into DTV which are 
only valid at receiving locations where the S/N ratio for the desired 
DTV signal is 28 dB or greater.\11\ At the edge of the DTV noise-
limited service area, where the S/N ratio is 16 dB, the value of D/U is 
23 dB for interference protection from another DTV station. New land 
mobile systems operating in this band employing wide band noise like 
signals may need to provide DTV stations the same increases in 
protection as indicated in Sec. 73.623(c)(3)(ii) of the rules.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See id. 73.623(c)(2).
    \12\ See id. at 73.623(c)(3)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    27. Since the Commission does not know the characteristics 
(bandwidth and power spectrum shape) of the co-channel threat to DTV in 
the re-allocated Channels 52-59, the Commission seeks comment on 
whether digital, wide-band emissions from these services in this band 
could cause interference to possible co-channel DTV operations, and may 
require the imposition of more restrictive criteria than those provided 
for under Sec. 90.545 of the Commission's rules. In particular, the 
Commission seeks comment on the adequacy of 17 dB for co-channel 
protection of DTV from wide band transmissions or whether the 
Commission should consider more conservative protection levels.
c. Coordination With Canada and Mexico
    28. The United States has bilateral agreements with both Canada and 
Mexico setting forth allotment and assignment plans for TV broadcast 
stations covering the 698-746 MHz band (Channels 52-59). While the U.S. 
has identified this band for reallocation to new services, neither 
Canada nor Mexico has done so to date.\13\ Pursuant to these 
agreements, the U.S. must protect the signals of Canadian and Mexican 
TV broadcast stations located in the border areas, and such operations 
will therefore affect U.S. non-broadcast use and services in this band. 
Accordingly, the Commission tentatively concludes that licenses issued 
for this band will be subject to whatever future agreements the United 
States develops with these two countries. The Commission further 
tentatively conclude that, until such time as existing agreements are 
replaced or modified to reflect the new uses, licenses in this band 
will be subject to existing agreements and the condition that harmful 
interference not be caused to, and must be accepted from, TV operations 
originating in Canada and Mexico. The Commission seeks comment on the 
Commission's tentative conclusions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ A recently-signed Letter of Understanding (``LOU'') with 
Canada recognizes U.S. plans to use this band for other than 
broadcasting services, and notes that Canada is independently 
considering a reduction of the spectrum in this band allocated to 
television. This LOU also specifically provides for non-broadcast 
allocations and services in the 746-806 MHz bands (Channels 60-69) 
by establishing criteria to protect DTV stations and analog TV 
stations established in accordance with the existing TV Agreement 
(Nov. 3, 1993--Jan. 5, 1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Service Rules

    29. One of the primary goals in this proceeding is to establish 
service rules that will promote innovative services and encourage the 
flexible and efficient use of this spectrum. In recent years the 
Commission has implemented the statutory directives under section 
309(j) of the Communications Act by addressing the growing complexities 
of spectrum management using approaches consistent with general market-
based principles. Consistent with the principles underlying the 
Spectrum Reallocation Policy Statement and the Secondary Markets Policy 
Statement, 65 FR 80367, December 21, 2000, the Commission tentatively 
concludes that the service rules for this band should implement 
flexible use for the full range of proposed allocated services, 
consistent with necessary interference requirements.
    30. In seeking to achieve the above objectives, the Commission 
recognizes that the service rules must also take into account the 
presence of incumbent broadcasters on the Lower 700 MHz Band and the 
processes established in the DTV proceeding for relocating incumbent 
broadcasters into the DTV core spectrum. The 698-746 MHz band is 
currently used as Channels 52-59 by a significant number of existing 
full service analog stations, LPTV stations, TV translator and booster 
stations, and by new DTV stations. These incumbent broadcasters, both 
analog and digital, may continue to operate on channel allotments in 
this band until at least December 31, 2006,\14\ or the relevant 
statutory conditions are met that allow incumbents to be relocated to 
channels in the DTV core spectrum of Channels 2-51. Therefore, the 
service rules for any new services on the Lower 700 MHz Band must 
provide for the protection of incumbent television stations during the 
DTV transition period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See 47 U.S.C. 309(j)(14)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    31. The Commission also seeks to establish rules that will 
facilitate, rather than hinder, the clearing of incumbent broadcasters 
from this spectrum in a manner consistent with the policy goal of 
locating all television channels in the DTV core spectrum, thus making 
the band available for a wide range of advanced services. While the 
Commission recognizes that different circumstances apply to the Lower 
700 MHz Band, the Commission seeks comment on potential mechanisms, 
with the focus on voluntary mechanisms, to encourage the smooth 
transition from incumbent broadcast services to new services due to the 
particular circumstances relating to the Lower 700 MHz Band.
    32. The Commission requests comment on a number of issues, such as 
the appropriate relationship between potential uses of the spectrum, 
the optimal size of the spectrum blocks available for auction, the 
appropriate size of geographic service areas, any channelization plan, 
and other characteristics that it should use to define licenses in the 
Lower 700 MHz Band. Comments should address whether particular 
characteristics would encourage a variety of technologies and

[[Page 19113]]

entrants, foster overall licensee flexibility, provide licensees with 
the maximum number of options to provide service, and promote the other 
objectives of the Communications Act. In addition, if the Commission 
was to adopt allocations other than those proposed in this Notice, the 
Commission seeks comment on whether the service rules should provide 
for all allocated services including, for example, satellite service.
    33. While the Commission seeks comment from the public in general 
concerning the matters set forth in the Notice, comment is specifically 
sought from Indian Tribal governments on the matters contained in the 
Notice. In keeping with the principles of the Tribal Government Policy 
Statement, 65 FR 41668, July 6, 2000, the Commission welcomes the 
opportunity to consult with Tribal governments on the issues raised by 
the Notice and seeks comment both from Tribal governments and other 
interested parties on the potential for the spectrum considerations set 
forth herein to serve the communications needs of tribal communities.
1. Scope of Licenses
a. Permissible Licensed Services
    34. The Commission seeks comment on the scope of services that 
should be licensed under the service rules adopted for the Lower 700 
MHz Band. Comments that are submitted in response to the Notice should 
address whether the service rules would encourage the active and 
efficient use of the Lower 700 MHz Band and enable new technologies and 
services.
    35. The Commission emphasizes its continued interest in the 
development of a variety of mechanisms to make spectrum markets more 
flexible and efficient in the choice of service to be offered by 
licensees and in the applicable service rules. The Commission seeks 
comment on whether to reallocate this spectrum in the 698-746 MHz band 
to permit fixed, mobile, and broadcast services on the 698-746 MHz 
band. The Commission seeks to develop service rules that are not based 
on its prediction of how these bands will ultimately be used, but 
instead enables the Commission to establish maximum practicable 
flexibility. Accordingly, the Commission requests comment on how 
innovative service rules and assignment mechanisms can maximize the use 
of this spectrum. The Commission also seeks comment on how new 
technologies may affect the extent to which service rules effectively 
provide for flexible, efficient, and intensive use of the spectrum.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See 47 U.S.C. 309(j)(3)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    36. In the Upper 700 MHz First Report and Order, The Commission 
decided not to adopt service rules that would permit both full power 
television and wireless services to operate on the Upper 700 MHz Band. 
The Commission found that the contrasting technical characteristics of 
full power television broadcasting, using power levels authorized by 
part 73,\16\ and wireless services effectively preclude the development 
of interference rules that would enable the practicable provision of 
both sets of services on the spectrum under consideration in that 
proceeding. In the Notice, the Commission solicits comment on the 
extent to which the service rules can permit both new full power 
broadcasting, in particular DTV and other digital broadcast operations, 
and wireless services to operate on the Lower 700 MHz Band. Commenters 
should consider the interference concerns that were addressed in the 
Upper 700 MHz proceeding, as well as any other relevant factors. The 
Commission seeks comment on whether the possible technology or 
technologies used to provide digital broadcast services, such as those 
using a cellular architecture, would be compatible with wireless 
services operating on the spectrum. In that regard, the Commission 
seeks comment on whether a 50 kW limit for full power broadcasting 
would permit both broadcasting operations and wireless services to use 
this spectrum, yet still allow flexible use of the spectrum consistent 
with technical and interference requirements. The Commission also 
requests comment on whether service rules that allow licensing of full 
power broadcasting on the band would affect the efficient use of the 
spectrum. To what extent would efforts to manage interference between 
such dissimilar transmissions as full power television and wireless 
services increase the possibility of substantial spectrum 
inefficiencies in the band? The Commission also seeks comment on 
whether the licensing of full power broadcasters on this band would 
impose disproportionate, offsetting burdens on wireless services, both 
fixed and mobile, and whether full power broadcasting would have a 
substantial impact on the technical effectiveness and economic 
practicability of wireless service providers operating on this band. In 
addition, the Commission seeks comment on whether any differences 
between the part 27 and part 73 rules that may affect the determination 
as to whether the service rules for the 698-746 MHz band should permit 
both full power television and wireless providers to operate on this 
band. The Commission notes that sections 309(j)(14)(C) and (D) of the 
Act, which apply to all spectrum reclaimed as part of the DTV 
transition, prevents the Commission from declaring any party 
ineligible, for ``any license that may be used for any digital 
television service'' in certain cities, on the basis of the duopoly 
rule and newspaper cross-ownership rule.\17\ The Commission seeks 
comment on the impact of these provisions on the determination of 
whether and how the service rules can and should permit broadcast and 
wireless providers to operate on the Lower 700 MHz Band.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See 47 CFR Part 73 (Broadcast Radio Services).
    \17\ See 47 U.S.C. 309(j)(14)(C)-(D); 47 CFR 73.3555(b), (d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    37. In the Upper 700 MHz First Report and Order, the Commission 
adopted service rules that addressed the need for a range of wireless 
applications and recast the part 27 rules to reflect their revised 
scope. The Commission decided to allow any new broadcast-type services 
consistent with the Table of Allocations, provided that such services 
satisfied the technical and service rules. The Commission seeks comment 
on whether to license new broadcast-type service on the Lower 700 MHz 
Band.
    38. The Notice does not make a specific proposal concerning an 
allocation in the Lower 700 MHz Band for satellite service, but 
requests comment on the matter. In the event that an allocation is made 
in this band for satellite service, the Commission seeks comment on 
whether auction winners should be afforded the flexibility to deploy 
satellite services, either themselves or by agreement with a satellite 
operator, within their licenses' geographic area, provided that such 
operations do not cause unacceptable interference to services operating 
in adjacent geographic areas. Further, if an allocation is made in this 
band for satellite service, the Commission seeks comment on the service 
rules that would apply to such service.
b. Size of Spectrum Blocks for Each License
    39. The Commission seeks comment on the appropriate amount of 
spectrum for each license in the 698-746 MHz band. Should the 
Commission license, for example, the spectrum as a single 48 megahertz 
block or should it be licensed as two or more smaller blocks?

[[Page 19114]]

    40. The Commission seeks comment first on whether the utility, and 
therefore value, of the spectrum would be enhanced by providing for the 
auction of a single block. A spectrum block of such size would seem to 
minimize the potential for third-party interference and thereby 
minimize the needed scope of the interference rules. In this regard, 
given the difficult incumbency issues associated with this band, the 
Commission seeks comment on whether economics associated with being a 
licensee of a large block of spectrum would make it easier for the 
licensee to develop services around existing incumbents, clear the band 
of incumbents, and generally deal with interference issues in the band. 
The Commission also requests comment on whether a single licensee, as 
opposed to numerous licensees, would be more likely to successfully 
negotiate the clearing of incumbent broadcasters from the spectrum. 
Would it be in the public interest to leave the determination of the 
internal framework of the 698-746 MHz band to one licensee? Comments 
should address both the possible and expected scope of use by a single 
48 megahertz licensee. Commenters should identify the range of services 
that could be offered if the Commission employs a license of this size. 
In addition, the Commission seeks comment on what spectrum block size 
would best facilitate the ``reasonable and timely'' \18\ deployment of 
broadband applications which may be spectrum-intensive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, 
Public Law 104-104, 110 Stat. 153 at 706 (set forth at 47 U.S.C. 157 
nt.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    41. The Commission seeks comment, alternatively, on whether to 
establish two or more blocks to license this spectrum, and what should 
be their size. The Commission seeks comment, for instance, on whether 
the spectrum should be licensed in two blocks of 24 megahertz each. 
Commenters also should address whether a block of 12 megahertz or more 
is required to provide access to a wide range of advanced 
telecommunications services. In addition, they should explain whether a 
block of six megahertz is necessary to enable wireless 
telecommunications services, or a viable digital television service. 
Licensing based on smaller spectrum blocks may be preferable for rural 
and small carriers. Parties who prefer smaller spectrum block sizes to 
larger blocks should identify the advantages that licensing based on 
smaller spectrum blocks would have on potential auction participants. 
If commenters support licensing based on spectrum blocks other than 
those discussed herein, they should state why other size spectrum 
blocks are more appropriate. The comments also should address the 
impact that the size of the spectrum blocks will have on the services 
that may be provided on this band, especially given the difficult 
incumbency issues.
    42. Comments are invited on whether to adopt a licensing plan for 
this band that provides for different sized blocks. The comments should 
address whether this approach could improve spectrum efficiency, offer 
greater flexibility in the use of spectrum, increase the diversity of 
services offered to consumers, and facilitate the development of 
advanced telecommunications services.
    43. The Commission also seeks comment generally on the minimum size 
of spectrum blocks needed to enable competitive commercial services. In 
this regard, the Commission notes that the simultaneous multiple round 
and combinatorial (or ``package'') auction design generally offers 
bidders substantial flexibility to aggregate blocks of spectrum for 
their particular uses. The Commission seeks comment on whether in light 
of the auction designs that may be available, the Commission should 
define spectrum block sizes that would require bidders to aggregate 
spectrum at auction to achieve the most efficient result. Such an 
approach may provide bidders with greater flexibility to implement 
their plans, as compared with the Commission's traditional approach 
toward defining spectrum blocks, which attempts to define optimal block 
size and allows adjustments through secondary market mechanisms, such 
as disaggregation, if such fine-tuning is necessary.
    44. Commenters should consider the relationship between the amount 
of spectrum per license and the ability to protect existing broadcast 
operations in this band during the transition to DTV. The comments 
should address how the size of the spectrum blocks will affect the 
licensees' ability to deploy new, innovative services and the impact 
that the size of the spectrum blocks may have on the ability of 
licensees to compete with existing fixed and mobile service providers. 
The comments also should consider the need to preserve licensee 
flexibility in technical and service application choices.
    45. In light of the presence of incumbent broadcasters on this 
band, the Commission seeks comment on whether spectrum blocks of six 
megahertz could be aligned in the 698-746 MHz band plan to correspond 
with individual six megahertz television channels. The Commission 
requests comment on whether the adoption of six megahertz blocks as an 
appropriately-sized spectrum block would facilitate clearing of the 
band by incumbent broadcasters or otherwise enhance the value of the 
spectrum. In addition, in this Notice, the Commission seeks comment on 
the possibility of a guard band or some other form of protection for 
services provided below this 698-746 MHz band, on television Channel 
51. The Commission requests comments on the impact of the adoption of 
service rules in this proceeding on the incumbent use of Channel 51.
c. Size of Service Areas for Geographic-Area Licensing
    46. The Commission tentatively concludes that it should adopt a 
geographic area licensing approach to assign licenses in the 698-746 
MHz band. In contrast to station-defined licensing (i.e., site-by-site 
licensing), the experience has been that geographic area licensing 
affords licensees substantial flexibility to respond to market demand 
and may result in significant improvements in spectrum utilization.
    47. Assuming that the Commission utilizes a geographic area 
approach for the 698-746 MHz band, the Commission seeks comment on the 
appropriate size of service areas on which licenses should be based. 
Should the Commission license, for example, all or part of the 48 
megahertz of reallocated spectrum on a nationwide basis, or would 
smaller geographic license sizes be more appropriate for this spectrum?
    48. The Commission seeks comment, first, on a possible nationwide 
license. Nationwide licenses have the advantage of providing carriers 
with more flexibility in the buildout of their services, as well as in 
coordinating with incumbents. In this regard, the Commission seeks 
comment on whether any problems associated with the operation of the 
many incumbent TV stations in this band may be better addressed by 
licensing this spectrum in larger areas where there may be less of a 
need for complicated protection agreements. Does the presence of a 
large number of broadcasters in the 698-746 MHz band make nationwide 
licenses more desirable than regional or other license sizes? The 
Commission also seeks comment on the extent to which nationwide 
licenses maximize the opportunity to provide the widest array of 
services and business plans. Do nationwide geographic licensing areas, 
especially in light of the proposal to

[[Page 19115]]

permit partitioning \19\ and the Commission's request for comments in 
the Notice about spectrum leasing, provide the necessary incentives for 
fostering the growth of existing technologies while encouraging the 
development of new applications? Would the adoption of nationwide 
geographic licensing areas provide potential savings to the time and 
cost of developing applications and manufacturing equipment to operate 
in the 698-746 MHz band?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ In light of the variety of potential services that the 
Commission envisions will be used in this reallocated band, 
including emerging technologies or next-generation applications, the 
most desirable or efficient scale of service area may vary according 
to the business plan of the potential licensee. Therefore, some 
licensees may need smaller service areas. The Notice tentatively 
concludes below to allow post-auction partitioning of licenses for 
bidders whose business plans require different size geographic areas 
than are adopted here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    49. In the Upper 700 MHz proceeding, the Commission chose six 
large, regional Economic Area Groupings (``EAGs'') for the 747-762 MHz 
and 777-792 MHz bands. The use of regional licenses may permit 
licensees to take advantage of the opportunities afforded by licensing 
spectrum on a wide regional basis. Accordingly, the Commission requests 
comments that address the possibility of issuing large, regional 
licenses in the 698-746 MHz band. Are the six EAGs the appropriate 
license size for this reallocated band? Are EAGs (or other regional 
licenses) preferable to nationwide licenses because they may more 
easily allow partitioning to serve the needs of smaller users and 
regional communities? If the Commission adopts six regional EAGs, the 
Commission seeks comment on what would be the optimal spectrum block 
size. Commenters should address whether blocks of 48 megahertz, 24 
megahertz, or smaller sizes would be appropriate for regional EAGs. The 
Commission notes that the simultaneous multiple round and combinatorial 
or package bidding auction designs generally offer bidders flexibility 
to aggregate multiple licenses to cover larger geographic areas for 
their particular uses. Would the opportunity to aggregate a small 
number of regional licenses be sufficient for those seeking to build a 
nationwide footprint? The Commission invites comment on how to define 
an appropriate geographic service area in light of the various types of 
bidding procedures that the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau now has 
at its disposal.
    50. Commenters should also address whether smaller geographic 
license sizes are appropriate for all or a subset of this spectrum. For 
example, the Commission has licensed spectrum using smaller territories 
defined by the 306 Metropolitan Statistical Areas (``MSAs'') and 428 
Rural Statistical Areas (``RSAs''), and the 172 EAs and three EA-like 
areas. When combined, the MSA and RSA service areas create the 734 
geographic areas that were originally used to license cellular service. 
Rural and smaller carriers may prefer licensing based on small 
geographic areas. If so, which license sizes are preferable to the 
larger, regional license sizes? Should the Commission license part of 
the 48 megahertz of spectrum on a large regional (or national) basis 
and the remaining part of the band in geographic areas of a medium or 
smaller scale? If commenters support licensing based on service 
territories other than those discussed previously, they should discuss 
why other types of service areas are more appropriate. In addition, the 
Commission seeks comment on the impact that the size of the service 
area will have on the participation in the auction by parties that may 
be eligible for the Commission's designated entities provisions.
    51. The Commission also seeks comment on whether to license the 
Gulf of Mexico as part of larger service areas, as the Commission did 
for the Upper 700 MHz Band, or whether to separately license a service 
area or service areas to cover the Gulf of Mexico. Commenters who 
advocate a separate service area or areas to cover the Gulf of Mexico 
should discuss what boundaries should be used and whether special 
interference protection criteria or performance requirements are 
necessary due to the unique radio propagation characteristics and 
antenna siting challenges that exist for Gulf licensees.
    52. The Commission seeks comment on the possible impact that 
broadcast use of this spectrum would have on the determination of the 
appropriate geographic service area. The Commission seeks comment 
elsewhere in the Notice on service rules that may permit the 698-746 
MHz band to be used by both full power broadcasting and wireless 
services. Parties who believe that such combined use should be 
permitted should first comment on the various choices the Commission is 
considering in this proceeding for part 27 geographic license areas and 
spectrum blocks and the impact that this scheme would have on the 
concept of a station's serving the needs and interests of its community 
of license pursuant to part 73. Those parties should also comment on 
any relation between the geographic service area and spectrum block 
decisions and the combined use of these bands by CMRS and full power 
broadcast services, which operate using significantly different power 
levels. The Commission seeks comment on how any decisions regarding 
spectrum channelization and power levels, if combined use were to be 
permitted, would affect the appropriate size of geographic licenses, in 
contrast to limiting or precluding broadcast use of the spectrum. The 
Commission also seeks comment on alternatives that would rely on 
licensing by geographic area, by community of license, or by some 
combination of these approaches.
d. Paired or Unpaired Spectrum Bands
    53. In the Upper 700 MHz proceeding, the Commission determined that 
spectrum blocks be established and licenses be assigned on the basis of 
paired bands. The Commission configured the 30 megahertz of spectrum in 
two paired bands: a 10 megahertz band, designated Block C, and a 20 
megahertz band, designated Block D. Each paired band constituted a 
spectrum block on which auction bids would be based in an EAG. The 
decision to adopt this paired band architecture reflected an assessment 
that the most commonly-used transmission procedure for Personal 
Communications Services (``PCS''), cellular, and other established 
mobile and fixed wireless applications, Frequency Division Duplex 
(``FDD''), requires paired spectrum.
    54. If the Commission decides that the spectrum in the 698-746 MHz 
band should be licensed in two or more blocks, should the spectrum be 
offered as contiguous or paired blocks and, if paired blocks, should 
the blocks be symmetric or asymmetric in size? The Commission seeks 
comment on the extent to which the spectrum should be paired or 
unpaired to enable viable commercial wireless services. Given bidders' 
opportunities to aggregate licenses under the simultaneous multiple 
round, combinatorial, and package auction designs, how would the 
adoption of either a paired or unpaired band structure impact the 
Commission's ability to achieve its spectrum management goals, 
including flexible and efficient spectrum use.\20\ The Commission 
requests comment on the degree to which paired or unpaired bands are 
suited to new technologies, particularly such technologies that would 
enhance the offering of advanced wireless telecommunications services. 
Comments should address the particular requirements of the various 
services and their technologies, including

[[Page 19116]]

transmission procedures such as FDD or Time Division Duplex (``TDD''), 
that would use this spectrum, and the impact on such services and 
technologies of the adopting either a paired or unpaired band 
architecture.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See 47 U.S.C. 309(j)(3)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    55. The Commission seeks comment on the extent to which the power 
limits that are to be established in this rulemaking should affect the 
adoption of a paired or unpaired band structure. In the Upper 700 MHz 
proceeding, the Commission allowed 1000 watt effective radiated power 
(``ERP'') base and fixed stations in both the lower and upper bands, 
and 30 watt ERP mobile and control station, as well as 3 Watts ERP 
portables, in both the upper and lower bands. If the Commission decides 
to adopt a paired band architecture for the 698-746 MHz band, should 
the Commission enable the use of both base and mobile transmitters on 
both bands? Furthermore, should the Commission use the same power 
limits as the Commission adopted in the Upper 700 MHz proceeding, or 
should some other power limits be authorized instead? To what extent 
should the Commission adopt power limits or out-of-band emission limits 
for the 698-746 MHz spectrum that are aimed at enabling TDD operations, 
or operations that are based on some other form of technology? Comments 
should address both the methodology to be used, e.g., whether the power 
limits should be the same or different for the two bands, and the 
specific power levels to be adopted.
    56. The Commission requests comment on the impact that the 
decisions on the size of spectrum blocks and of the service area should 
have on the decision on whether to adopt paired or unpaired spectrum 
bands. For example, would the adoption of smaller spectrum blocks be 
more or less appropriate in a paired band structure than in an unpaired 
band structure? Would a decision to license blocks that are large 
enough for full power broadcast service and to permit sharing of the 
spectrum by wireless and full power broadcast providers have an impact 
on the decision to license spectrum on a paired or unpaired basis?
    57. The Commission also solicits comment on whether and to what 
extent the use of paired or unpaired spectrum bands would accommodate 
entities seeking to negotiate voluntary transition agreements with 
incumbent television licensees that could enable the clearing of such 
incumbent licensees from the 698-746 MHz band. Comments should address 
whether such efforts to facilitate transition agreements are consistent 
with the objectives of seeking to promote the rapid development of new 
technologies and the efficient and effective use of the spectrum.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See 47 U.S.C. 309(j)(3)(A), (D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Technical Rules
a. General Technical Rules
    58. The Commission seeks comment on whether the general provisions 
of part 27 of the rules should be applied to the 698-746 MHz band, and 
specifically on any rules that would be affected by the proposal to 
apply elements of the part 27 framework, whether separately or in 
conjunction with part 73 requirements, to full power broadcast 
services, or to any other parts of the rules. The Commission solicits 
comment concerning the appropriate rules to adopt for co-channel 
interference control, out-of-band \22\ and spurious emission \23\ 
limits, and power limits and radiofrequency (RF) safety requirements. 
The comments also should address whether all of these technical rules 
would apply to all licensees in the 698-746 MHz band, including 
licensees who acquire their licenses through partitioning or 
disaggregation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 47 CFR 2.1(c).
    \23\ Id. 2.1(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Co-Channel Interference Control
    59. Historically, the Commission has issued rules governing the 
technical and operating parameters of radio transmitters in order to 
reduce to a pre-determined level the interference between licensees 
using the same spectrum assignment in adjacent geographical locations.
    60. Recently, the Commission has established new broadband wireless 
services wherein licensees are authorized to utilize any technology 
satisfying basic technical rules to provide any type of fixed or mobile 
service. In the Notice, the Commission seeks comment on a wide range of 
uses in the Allocation Table. Accordingly, the Commission is 
potentially allowing a broad range of technologies and services for 
possible co-existence within this spectrum, and the nature of the 
services and technologies can affect the potential for interference 
between licensees using the same spectrum in adjacent service areas. 
The Commission is particularly interested in receiving comments on 
potential interference issues that could arise in the event that the 
Commission decides to reallocate the 698-746 MHz band for use by fixed, 
mobile, and broadcast services or any combination of these services.
    61. The Commission has adopted rules employing one or the other of 
two methods for broadband fixed and mobile services in regard to 
addressing the issue of co-channel interference between adjacent 
systems. In the Cellular Radiotelephone Service, the Commission has 
mandated that adjacent users coordinate spectrum usage by facilities 
within 121 kilometers (75 miles) of each other and to resolve technical 
problems that may inhibit effective and efficient use of the 
spectrum.\24\ This method is a coordination requirement. In the 
Personal Communications Service and the Wireless Communications 
Service, the Commission has instead adopted rules requiring that the 
licensees limit the strength of their signals (``field strength'') to 
some prescribed value at the boundary of their geographical license 
area.\25\ Provided that the specified field strength limit is met, 
licensees may unilaterally deploy facilities in the boundary area 
without coordinating with adjacent licensees. This latter method is the 
field strength limit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See 47 CFR 22.907.
    \25\ See 47 CFR 24.236, 27.55.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    62. In the Upper 700 MHz proceeding, the Commission adopted a field 
strength limit rather than a coordination requirement to control co-
channel interference in the band. The Commission found that a 
coordination method could impose unnecessary coordination costs in the 
case of facilities that were unlikely to cause interference, and 
possibly could lead to anti-competitive activities. The Commission also 
determined that the field strength limit will apply to base and fixed 
stations, the maximum field strength permitted along the geographic 
area border will be 40 dBV/m, and that issues of compliance 
will be determined by calculations using the TV broadcast field 
strength curves. The use of this procedure was found to potentially 
enable licensees to deploy their facilities effectively, while 
minimizing interference to co-channel licensees in adjacent areas. The 
Commission seeks comment on whether this universal field strength limit 
rule will in fact minimize interference between all adjacent systems 
using the same or overlapping spectrum regardless of what types of 
service, technologies, emission types or power levels are used.
    63. The Commission seeks comment on whether to adopt rules 
establishing a boundary field strength limit to control co-channel 
interference in the 698-746 MHz band. If the Commission was to choose 
this method, what should be the field strength limit? Should it be 40 
dBV/m or some other value? The Commission requests comment on

[[Page 19117]]

whether a field strength limit would reduce the need for coordination 
by giving licensees the ability unilaterally to deploy facilities in 
boundary areas as long as the limit is met. The Commission also seeks 
comment on whether a field strength limit by itself may provide 
insufficient assurance against interference among co-channel licensees. 
Even with a boundary limit, would some degree of coordination and joint 
planning between bordering licensees be needed to ensure efficient use 
across the boundary? To the extent such coordination between adjacent 
licensees is likely to be needed, to what extent can the Commission 
rely on purely voluntary procedures to reach efficient results? Would 
any rules or guidelines be beneficial in facilitating such 
coordination? The Commission also seeks comment on whether to adopt 
criteria to protect Lower 700 MHz stations employing video broadcasting 
similar to the protection criteria that the Commission establishes 
herein to protect incumbent DTV stations.
    64. The Commission seeks comment on whether to adopt a coordination 
requirement instead of a field strength limit to control co-channel 
interference in this band. In the event the Commission decides to use a 
coordination requirement, how far from the boundary should the 
coordination zone be located? Would a general coordination requirement 
minimize the potential for interference or impose unnecessary 
coordination for facilities with a low potential for interference under 
either approach?
    65. Commenters should provide an analysis of the advantages and 
disadvantages of both approaches, or approaches that combine a boundary 
limit and coordination procedure. The Commission seeks comment, for 
example, on whether anti-competitive behavior could result from the 
adoption of either approach. Moreover, how do the two methodologies 
compare in terms of their effect on licensee costs? The comments should 
address these questions in the context of whether one method or the 
other would enable licensees to deploy their facilities effectively, 
while minimizing interference to co-channel licensees in adjacent 
geographic areas. The Commission also seeks comment on whether there 
are methods to control interference in the Lower 700 MHz Band that 
would be more effective than coordination or boundary field strength 
limits.
    66. In the event that the Commission adopts a field strength 
methodology, the Commission seeks comment on whether licensees in 
adjoining areas should be permitted to agree to alternative field 
strengths at their common border. If the Commission was to agree to 
such a procedure, what would be the impact in terms of increased 
flexibility and harmful interference? The Commission invites comment on 
this approach to control interference in the context of the 698-746 MHz 
band, both generally and if used in conjunction with field strength 
standards. Should the Commission adopt a general coordination approach 
is adopted, comments are requested on whether specific aspects of 
procedures, such as those contained in Sec. 22.150 of the Commission's 
rules,\26\ should apply or, alternatively, whether a general 
requirement such as the cellular rule \27\ should apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 47 CFR 22.150.
    \27\ See id. at 22.907.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    67. Section 27.64 of the Commission's rules \28\ states generally 
that part 27 stations operating in full accordance with applicable 
Commission rules and the terms and conditions of their authorizations 
are normally considered to be non-interfering, and provides for 
Commission action, after notice and hearing, to require modifications 
to eliminate significant interference. In view of the variety of 
services that might be provided by part 27 licensees on this band, 
including broadcasting, the Commission solicits comment on whether to 
apply this rule for this spectrum. The Commission also seeks comment 
regarding whether interference protection can be achieved and whether 
Sec. 27.64 of the rules should be modified to direct adjacent service 
area licensees to cooperate to eliminate or ameliorate interference. 
This alternative would require each licensee ultimately to assume 
responsibility for protecting its own receiving system from 
interference from transmitters in adjoining areas that meet the 
standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ Id. at 27.64.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    68. The Commission seeks comment on what interference criteria 
should be established in the event the Commission adopts service rules 
that permit full power broadcasting and wireless services to sharing 
the 698-746 MHz band. The Commission also seeks comment on whether to 
adopt any protection of television service provisions addressed 
elsewhere in the Notice into the co-channel interference rule.
c. Out-of-Band and Spurious Emission Limits
    69. In many of the radio services, the Commission often requires 
that out-of-band emissions be limited to no more than 50 microWatts (50 
W) of transmitter output power over a typical instrument 
measurement bandwidth. The rules that implement this requirement 
generally do so in the form of an attenuation requirement of 43 + 10 
log P dB. In the Upper 700 MHz proceeding, the Commission adopted this 
general out-of-band emission limit to apply to equipment transmitting 
in the 747-762 and 777-792 MHz bands that were the subject of the 
service rules under consideration. However, the Commission also adopted 
more strict limits for out-of-band emissions that fall within the 
Global Positioning Service (``GPS'') band and within the 764-776 MHz 
and 794-806 MHz public safety bands. The Commission invites comment on 
what out-of-band emission standards should be established in the 
service rules for the Lower 700 MHz Band. The Commission seeks comment 
on whether to adopt a rule applying the general out-of-band emission 
attenuation requirement of 43 + 10 log P dB to equipment used in the 
698-746 MHz band. What are the potential costs and benefits of 
requiring greater or lesser attenuation of out-of-band emissions? The 
Commission also requests comment on any other emission limits that 
commenters believe to be appropriate. For example, should the limit 
specify a single out-of-band attenuation level or should it specify a 
power roll-off that increases attenuation as frequency separation from 
the channel boundary increases?
    70. In the Upper 700 MHz proceeding the Commission found that 
stricter attenuation requirements were required to adequately protect 
the public safety bands from interference. The Commission adopted an 
attenuation requirement of 65 + 10 log P dB per 6.25 kHz for mobile and 
portable transmitters, and an attenuation requirement of 76 + 10 log P 
dB per 6.25 kHz for base and fixed transmitters for out-of-band 
emissions that fall within the 764-776 MHz and 794-806 MHz public 
safety bands. The Commission requests comment on whether it is 
necessary to adopt a rule, applicable to equipment transmitting in the 
698-746 MHz band, that provides more stringent attenuation requirements 
for out-of-band emissions that fall within the 764-776 MHz and 794-806 
MHz public safety bands. The Commission seeks comment on whether 
equipment transmitting in the upper portion of the 698-746 MHz 
commercial band poses a risk of interference to public safety 
operations that justifies adoption of these more stringent attenuation 
requirements. The Commission also

[[Page 19118]]

seeks comment on what resolution bandwidth should be used for 
measurements to determine compliance with the out-of-band emission 
limits.
d. Power Limits and RF Safety
    71. In the Upper 700 MHz proceeding, the Commission concluded that 
with regard to communications power requirements, equipment 
transmitting in the 747-762 MHz and 777-792 MHz bands will have 
characteristics similar to equipment used in other services in the sub-
microwave UHF frequency bands. Accordingly, rules were adopted that 
provided a maximum power limit of 1000 Watts ERP for base and fixed 
stations, 30 Watts ERP for vehicular mobile transmitters and 3 Watts 
ERP for hand held portable transmitters. The Commission requests 
comment on whether these limits are also appropriate for base, fixed, 
mobile and portable transmitters operating in the 698-746 MHz band, or 
whether some other limits should be adopted. The Commission also seeks 
comment on the use of up to 50 kW ERP for video broadcasting in this 
band.
    72. The Commission considers RF safety procedures to be essential 
in protecting human beings from excessive exposure to RF energy. 
Accordingly, the Commission proposes to require that facilities and 
devices operating in the Lower 700 MHz Band be subject to the existing 
RF safety criteria and procedures applicable to facilities and devices 
having similar technical parameters and operating characteristics.\29\ 
The Commission seeks comment on this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See 47 CFR 1.1307(b), 1.1310, 2.1091, 2.1093.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Licensing Rules
    73. The Commission seeks comment below on the licensing rules for a 
full range of possible licensees, in accordance with the stated 
intention to permit as much flexibility in the use of this spectrum as 
is consistent with the requirements of section 303(y) of the 
Communications Act. The Commission seeks comment generally on whether 
licensees in the reallocated 698-746 MHz band should be governed by 
part 27 of the Commission's rules. Part 27 was established to satisfy 
the requirement in section 3001 of the Omnibus Consolidated 
Appropriations Act of 1997 to reallocate and assign the use of the 
frequencies at 2305-2320 MHz and 2345-2360 MHz. Part 27 was initially 
adopted to govern services offered on those bands, and accorded 
licensees the flexibility to provide any fixed, mobile or radiolocation 
service contained in the Table of Allocations in part 2 of the 
Commission's rules. The regulatory framework of part 27 includes, inter 
alia: (i) the limitation of eligibility requirements to foreign 
ownership restrictions set forth in section 310 of the Communications 
Act; (ii) exclusion of part 27 spectrum holdings from application of 
the CMRS spectrum cap; (iii) flexibility to partition geographic 
service areas and disaggregate spectrum blocks; (iv) determination of 
regulatory status by licensee's designation in their long-form 
applications; and (v) incorporation, with some exceptions, of the 
competitive bidding rules set forth in part 1 of the Commission's 
rules. The Commission adapted and applied the part 27 licensing 
procedures to the 746-764 MHz and 776-794 MHz bands in the Upper 700 
MHz proceeding.
a. Regulatory Status
    74. The Commission tentatively concludes that a licensee in the 
698-746 MHz band may include any or a combination of services with more 
than one regulatory status in a single license. In adopting a flexible 
licensing framework for part 27, the Commission permitted applicants to 
request more than one regulatory status for authorization in a single 
license, rather than require the applicant to choose a single status 
for its proposed services. Thus, a part 27 license may authorize a 
combination of common carrier, non-common carrier and broadcast 
services in a single license, and the part 27 licensee may render any 
kind of communications service consistent with that regulatory status. 
As the Commission tentatively concludes to authorize licensees in the 
698-746 MHz band to provide a variety of services (e.g., fixed, mobile, 
etc.) under more than one regulatory status (i.e., common carrier, non-
common carrier, and/or broadcast), any one licensee would be permitted 
to provide any combination of services, anywhere within its licensed 
area at any time, consistent with its regulatory status and 
interference protection requirements. Given the decision to apply this 
part 27 licensing framework in the Upper 700 MHz proceeding, the 
Commission seeks comment on the tentative conclusion to adopt this same 
framework for licensing services in the 698-746 MHz band. Does applying 
the same approach used for the Upper 700 MHz Band to this reallocated 
698-746 MHz spectrum achieve efficiencies in the licensing and 
administrative processes?
    75. Assuming that a 698-746 MHz licensee regulated under part 27 
may provide any communications service consistent with its authorized 
regulatory status, the Commission seeks comment on whether that 
licensee should be subject to other Commission rules specifically 
applicable to the nature of the service provided. Alternatively, the 
Commission seeks comment on whether to amend part 27 to include any 
other obligations for certain services authorized on this band. For 
example, the Communications Act applies specific requirements to 
broadcasters and common carriers that are not applied to other part 27 
licensees. In the Upper 700 MHz First Report and Order, the Commission 
determined that the provision of ``new broadcast-type'' services does 
not alter the underlying broadcast nature of such services on the Upper 
700 MHz Band, and as a result, such services are subject to the 
regulatory and statutory provisions governing broadcast service. 
However, in the Upper 700 MHz MO&O and FNPRM, the Commission declined 
to go so far as to apply an ``equivalent regulatory regime'' from part 
73 of the rules to part 27 broadcast licensees in the Upper 700 MHz 
band, stating that the Commission would determine the applicable 
regulatory framework in the context of the offering of specific, actual 
new broadcast-type services. The Commission tentatively concludes that 
the Commission will adopt the same approach for part 27 broadcast 
licensees on the 698-746 MHz band as the Commission did for the Upper 
700 MHz Band. The Commission seeks comment generally on any provisions 
in existing, service-specific rules that may require specific 
recognition or adjustment to comport with the potential supervening 
application of part 27, as well as any provisions that would be 
necessary in part 27 to fully describe the scope of covered service and 
technologies.
    76. The possible inclusion of full power broadcasting within the 
reallocated 698-746 MHz band is more problematic with respect to the 
licensing and administrative process. The Commission asks commenters to 
address whether a decision to permit full power broadcasting within 
this band affects the tentative conclusion that there should be no 
additional requirements for new broadcast-type licensees operating 
under part 27.\30\ If the Commission decides to permit full

[[Page 19119]]

power broadcasting in this reallocated spectrum, should part 73 apply 
to licensees to the extent they provide any broadcast services 
(including full power broadcasting as well as new broadcast-type 
services) and should part 27 apply to the extent licensees provide 
other wireless services?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ This discussion is limited to the question of whether 
different Commission-imposed regulations should apply to 
broadcasters depending on whether they are providing new broadcast-
type services or full power broadcasting on the 698-746 MHz band. To 
the extent that a Lower 700 MHz licensee's services (either new 
broadcast-type services or full power broadcasting) fall within the 
statutory definition of broadcasting, they will be subject to the 
statutory provisions of the Communications Act governing 
broadcasting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    77. Consistent with the part 27 framework adopted for the Upper 700 
MHz Band, the Commission seeks comment on whether applicants and 
licensees in the 698-746 MHz band should also be required to indicate 
to the Commission the regulatory status of any services that they 
choose to provide. To ensure compliance with the statutory requirements 
of Titles II and III of the Communications Act, the Commission has 
often required applicants to designate the regulatory status of the 
services they intend to provide. For example, the Commission's current 
Form 601 Application for Wireless Telecommunications Bureau--Radio 
Service Authorization requires an applicant to indicate whether the 
service it intends to offer will be common carrier, non-common carrier, 
private, broadcast, and/or band manager. If the Commission decides to 
require 698-746 MHz applicants and licensees to designate their 
regulatory status, does the Form 601 need to be revised in any way? To 
the extent that full power broadcast service is included in this 
reallocated spectrum, is there a need to modify the Form 601 or any 
other appropriate form(s) that an applicant may use to seek these 
services, either solely or in conjunction with other services under a 
single license?
    78. The Commission seeks comment on whether applicants and 
licensees in the 698-746 MHz band should be required to describe their 
proposed services. In adopting part 27, the Commission stated that, 
apart from this designation of regulatory status, the Commission would 
not require applicants to describe the services they seek to provide. 
Likewise, in the Upper 700 MHz proceeding, the Commission stated that 
it is sufficient that an applicant indicate its choice of regulatory 
status in a streamlined application process. Should the Commission 
apply a similar approach to services provided in the Lower 700 MHz 
Band, including full power broadcast as well as new broadcast-type 
services? If potential applicants are unsure of the nature of their 
services and their classification, the Commission seeks comment on 
whether to require applicants to submit a petition with their 
applications requesting clarification and including service 
descriptions for that purpose.
    79. The Commission also seeks comment on whether to permit 
licensees to change their service in such a way that it alters their 
regulatory status. If the Commission permits licensees to alter their 
regulatory status, what procedures should it adopt to provide for this 
change? The Commission seeks comment on whether to require such 
licensees to notify the Commission that they have altered their status, 
even if such change would not require prior Commission authorization. 
Similar to Upper 700 MHz Band licensees, should licensees in the Lower 
700 MHz Band be required to notify the Commission within 30 days of the 
change, unless the change results in the discontinuance, reduction, or 
impairment of the existing service, in which case a different time 
period may apply? In these situations, how can the Commission best 
maximize a carriers' flexibility in service offerings while also 
implementing, for example, the requirement in section 214(a) of the 
Communications Act that the Commission certify that the public 
convenience and necessity will not be adversely affected by such 
actions initiated by carriers? \31\ Does the potential inclusion of 
broadcasting, including full power broadcast services, require us to 
modify this approach? Because full power broadcast licensees are 
subject to different ownership rules and attribution standards than 
wireless licensees, the Commission requests comment on what procedures 
should apply when a licensee changes its offerings between these 
regulatory classifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See 47 U.S.C. 214(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    80. The Commission seeks comment on whether to permit licensees to 
lease their licensed spectrum usage rights in accordance with the 
proposals may be adopted in the Secondary Markets NPRM, 65 FR 81475, 
December 26, 2000, corrected by 66 FR 8149, January 29, 2001. In the 
alternative, the Commission asks commenters to address any unique 
attributes of the Lower 700 MHz Band (e.g., level of incumbency) that 
would justify a level of flexibility different from what the Commission 
adopts generally in that proceeding. In considering leasing 
arrangements in the Secondary Markets NPRM, the Commission stated the 
primary issue may be whether all licensees in certain services should 
have the option to use some or all of their licensed spectrum in the 
same manner as a band manager, i.e., to make spectrum available to 
third party users without the need for prior Commission approval, while 
retaining primary responsibility for compliance with the Commission's 
rules. The Commission also seeks comment on the potential for band 
manager licensing to provide flexibility for the Lower 700 MHz Band 
given the distinctive technical and/or policy issues associated with 
its reallocation. Because the Commission has not issued a decision in 
the Secondary Markets proceeding, the Commission seeks comment on the 
extent to which leasing arrangements and/or band manager licensing 
would help achieve the maximum flexibility possible for the use of this 
spectrum, consistent with technical and regulatory constraints.
    81. The Commission also seeks comment on whether the service and 
auction rules should have any special provisions for private radio and/
or public safety services on the 698-746 MHz band. For example, should 
parties who would function as band managers with the ability to lease 
their spectrum rights to various types of users, including private 
radio and/or public safety users, be eligible to bid for this spectrum? 
To enable the full and flexible use of this reallocated spectrum, the 
Commission asks commenters to address any specific measures that should 
be taken to accommodate the provision of private and public safety 
regulatory classes of services.
b. Eligibility
    82. In the Upper 700 MHz First Report and Order, the Commission 
decided to impose no restrictions on eligibility for a license in the 
747-762 MHz and 777-792 MHz bands, other than the foreign ownership 
restrictions set forth in section 310 of the Communications Act. 
Consistent with this approach, the Commission proposes that there be no 
restrictions on eligibility for a license in the 698-746 MHz band. The 
Commission seeks comment on the view that opening this spectrum to as 
wide a range of applicants as possible will encourage entrepreneurial 
efforts to develop new technologies and services, while helping to 
ensure efficient use of this spectrum. Commenters also should address 
how the proposed policy to not impose restrictions on eligibility 
should apply to possible use of this spectrum for broadcasting.
    83. The Commission also seeks comment on the character 
qualification standard that should be applied to licensees in the 698-
746 MHz band. While the character qualification standards applied to 
broadcasters have provided guidance in common carrier proceedings, the 
Commission has said

[[Page 19120]]

that these standards are not ``directly applicable'' to common 
carriers. The Commission seeks comment on whether there is any reason 
that full power broadcasters who share spectrum with part 27 wireless 
services, including wireless common carrier offerings, should not be 
governed by the existing standards applied to part 73 licensees. The 
Commission also seeks comment on whether there is any reason the 
Commission cannot apply the current rules to decide whether an entity 
that has been disqualified from holding a full power part 73 
broadcasting license pursuant to the character qualification rules 
should be eligible to provide non-broadcasting services pursuant to a 
part 27 license.
c. Spectrum Aggregation Limits
    84. To the extent that the Commission allocates spectrum within the 
698-746 MHz band for the provision of CMRS, the Commission seeks 
comment on whether spectrum in this band, if used to provide CMRS, 
should be subject to the Commission's 45/55 MHz CMRS spectrum cap.\32\ 
Currently, 180 MHz of broadband PCS, cellular, and SMR spectrum 
regulated as CMRS is subject to the Commission's 45 MHz (55 MHz in 
rural areas) spectrum cap. Part 27 of the Commission's rules does not 
limit the amount of spectrum that an entity may aggregate in any given 
geographic area. In the Upper 700 MHz proceeding, the Commission 
refrained from extending the CMRS spectrum cap to the newly reallocated 
746-764 and 776-794 MHz bands.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See 47 CFR 20.6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    85. In light of the findings in the Upper 700 MHz proceeding, the 
Commission seeks comment on whether to abstain from counting the 698-
746 MHz band against the CMRS spectrum cap. Alternatively, if the 
Commission decides to apply the spectrum cap to this spectrum, the 
Commission seeks comment on whether and if so, how much, the Commission 
should increase the amount of spectrum a single entity can hold beyond 
the 45/55 MHz threshold. In this regard, it has been the expectation 
that newly available CMRS-suitable spectrum either should be excluded 
from the cap, or if it is included, that the cap should be adjusted 
accordingly. Under the former alternative, if the spectrum does not 
count towards the cap and licensees use it for provision of CMRS, what 
impact will that have on competition in the CMRS marketplace? Under the 
latter alternative, what impact would an increase of the cap have on 
the reduction or concentration of competition and on changes in the 
prices or to the quality of services. Commenters should address the 
relevance of the factors that the Commission considered in the decision 
not to apply the spectrum cap to the 746-764 and 776-794 MHz bands, 
including (1) whether applying the spectrum cap would be consistent 
with the goals of seeking flexible use of this spectrum; (2) whether 
permitting licensees to acquire all of the available lower 700 MHz 
spectrum in a given geographic area would result in economies of scale 
that could promote a variety of services, including advanced wireless 
services; and (3) whether it makes sense to count this spectrum against 
the cap if the extent to which the 698-746 MHz band will be used for 
CMRS services is not clear.
    86. The Commission also seeks comment on whether spectrum in the 
698-746 MHz band should be subject to any other aggregation limits. The 
Commission decided not to adopt any in-band spectrum aggregation limits 
for the 747-762 MHz and 777-792 MHz bands. Similarly, should the 
Commission not restrict the amount of commercial spectrum that any one 
licensee may obtain in the 698-746 MHz band in the same licensed 
geographic service area? If so, comment is then sought on whether there 
should be any cross-band aggregation limits between the 747-762 MHz and 
777-792 MHz bands, and the 698-746 MHz band. Should the Commission 
preclude or otherwise limit an entity from obtaining all 78 MHz of 
spectrum in the combined Upper and Lower 700 MHz Bands in the same 
geographic area?
d. Foreign Ownership Restrictions
    87. In the Upper 700 MHz First Report and Order, the Commission 
concluded that Sec. 27.12 of the Commission's rules, which implements 
section 310 of the Act,\33\ should apply to applicants for licenses in 
the 747-762 MHz and 777-792 MHz bands. The Commission tentatively 
concludes that Sec. 27.12 of the Commission's Rules should apply to 
applicants for 698-746 MHz band licenses. With respect to the alien 
ownership reporting requirements, the Commission tentatively concludes 
that it will require all licensees in the 698-746 MHz band spectrum to 
file changes in foreign ownership information to the extent required by 
part 27 of the rules. The Commission requests comment on this approach.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ 47 U.S.C. Sec. 310.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

e. License Term; Renewal Expectancy
    88. The Communications Act imposes no term limit on licenses issued 
by the Commission, other than those for broadcast services, which are 
limited to an eight-year license term.\34\ The statute also specifies 
renewal criteria for broadcast stations.\35\ Part 27 of the 
Commission's rules provides for license term limits and renewal 
expectancy for other than new broadcast-type services. Section 27.13(a) 
limits license terms for certain licensees to 10 years from the date of 
original issuance or renewal,\36\ and Sec. 27.14(b) establishes a right 
to a renewal expectancy.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See 47 U.S.C. 307(c)(1); see also 47 CFR 73.1020(a).
    \35\ See 47 U.S.C. 309(k).
    \36\ 47 CFR 27.13(a).
    \37\ See id. 27.14(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    89. In the Upper 700 MHz First Report and Order, the Commission 
modified the license term as it relates to the 747-762 MHz and 777-792 
MHz bands, to accommodate licensees' need for additional time to 
develop and use this spectrum, in light of its continued use by 
broadcasters until 2006. The Commission decided that initial licenses 
for the 746-764 MHz and 776-794 MHz bands would extend eight years 
beyond the year 2006, the date as of which incumbent broadcasters are 
required to have relocated to other portions of the spectrum, (i.e., 
January 1, 2015, see Upper 700 MHz Errata, 65 FR 57267, September 21, 
2000) subject to certain conditions. However, a licensee that commences 
new broadcast-type operations on or before January 1, 2006, will be 
required to seek renewal of its license at the end of the eight-year 
term following commencement of such broadcast operations.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ See 47 CFR 27.13(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    90. The Commission seeks comment on the appropriate license term to 
apply with respect to licensees in the 698-746 MHz band. The Commission 
seeks comment on whether to adopt the license term and renewal 
provisions in part 27 of the Commission's Rules, for other than new 
broadcast-type services.\39\ The Commission therefore seeks specific 
comment on whether the initial license term for licenses, other than 
new broadcast-type services, should expire on January 1, 2015. In 
addition, the Commission seeks comment on other alternatives, such as a 
10-year license term. Commenters should also address whether it would 
be possible to have different license terms, depending on the type of 
service offered by the licensee. The Commission also seeks comment on 
how the Commission

[[Page 19121]]

would administer such an approach, particularly if licensees provide 
more than one service in their service area, or decide to change the 
type of service they plan to offer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ See 47 CFR 27.13(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    91. Furthermore, in the Upper 700 MHz First Report and Order, the 
Commission adopted the right to a renewal expectancy established in 
Sec. 27.14(b).\40\ The Commission found that in order for a licensee 
involved in a comparative renewal proceeding to claim a renewal 
expectancy that licensee must include, at a minimum, the showing 
required by Sec. 27.14(c) of the Commission's rules. The Commission 
seeks comment on whether to likewise adopt the right to a renewal 
expectancy established in Sec. 27.14 for licensees in the 698-746 MHz 
band.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ 47 CFR 27.14(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    92. The Commission also seeks comment on whether a new broadcast 
licensee operating in the Lower 700 MHz Band would be able to claim the 
renewal expectancy established by section 309(k) of the Act.\41\ The 
Commission seeks comment on whether there should be a distinction 
between the renewal expectancy that the Commission will provide to new 
broadcasters in the Lower 700 MHz Band and licensees offering other 
services (i.e., datacasting and other wireless services) on this band.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ See 47 U.S.C. 309(k).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    93. Consistent with part 27, in the Upper 700 MHz First Report and 
Order, the Commission found that in the event that a license is 
partitioned or disaggregated, any partitionee or disaggregatee shall be 
authorized to hold its license for the remainder of the original 
licensee's term, and the partitionee or disaggregatee may obtain a 
renewal expectancy on the same basis as other licensees in the 
band.\42\ Further, the Commission decided that all licensees meeting 
the substantial service requirement will be deemed to have met this 
part of the renewal expectancy requirement regardless of which of the 
construction options the licensees have chosen. The Commission 
concluded that this approach is appropriate because a licensee, through 
partitioning, should not be able to confer greater rights than it has 
been awarded under the terms of its license grant. The Commission seeks 
comment on taking this approach with respect to 698-746 MHz licensees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ See 47 CFR 27.15(d), 27.324(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

f. Performance Requirements
    94. Section 27.14(a) of the Commission's rules requires licensees 
to provide ``substantial service'' in their service areas within their 
prescribed license term. Failure to meet this requirement will result 
in forfeiture of the license.\43\ In the Upper 700 MHz First Report and 
Order, the Commission amended the performance requirement in 
Sec. 27.14(a) as it relates to the 747-762 MHz and 777-792 MHz bands. 
The Commission required in the 747-762 MHz and 777-792 MHz bands to 
provide substantial service to their service areas no later than 
January 1, 2015, eight years after December 31, 2006, the date as of 
which incumbent broadcasters are required to have relocated to other 
portions of the spectrum. This section defines substantial service ``as 
service which is sound, favorable, and substantially above a level of 
mediocre service which just might minimally warrant renewal.'' In the 
Part 27 Report and Order, 62 FR 9636, March 3, 1997, the LMDS Second 
Report and Order, 62 FR 23148, April 29, 1997, and the Upper 700 MHz 
First Report and Order, the Commission adopted safe harbors that would 
demonstrate substantial service. In implementing its auction 
procedures, section 309(j)(4)(B) of the Communications Act requires the 
Commission to include safeguards to protect the public interest in the 
use of the spectrum and performance requirements ``to ensure prompt 
delivery of service to rural areas, to prevent stockpiling or 
warehousing of spectrum by licensees or permittees, and to promote 
investment in and rapid deployment of new technologies and services.'' 
\44\ In addition, the Commission seeks to promote the efficient and 
effective use of the spectrum.\45\ The Commission invites comment on 
the development of service rules to meet these objectives.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ See 47 CFR 27.14(a).
    \44\ 47 U.S.C. 309(j)(4)(B); see id. 309(j)(3).
    \45\ See 47 U.S.C. 309(j)(3)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    95. The Commission seeks comment on whether to require licensees in 
the 698-746 MHz band to provide substantial service on January 1, 2015, 
the date that the Commission requires licensees in the 747-762 and 777-
792 MHz band to provide substantial service. The Commission also seeks 
comment on whether to adopt any safe harbors for licensees in the 698-
746 MHz band. In the Upper 700 MHz First Report and Order, the 
Commission adopted two safe harbors for fixed services: (1) for a 
licensee who chooses to offer fixed, point-to-point services, the 
construction of the permanent links per one million people in its 
licensed service area during its license term or at the license-renewal 
mark would constitute substantial service; and (2) for a licensee who 
chooses to offer fixed, point-to-multipoint services, a demonstration 
of coverage for 20 percent of the population of its licensed service 
area during its licensed term or at the license-renewal mark would 
constitute substantial service. The Commission also there encouraged 
licensees to build out not only in urban areas and areas of high 
density population but in rural areas as well, or to partition their 
license to allow others to do so. In addition, the Commission seeks 
comment on whether to adopt safe harbors for mobile services (assuming 
the Commission adopts the substantial service requirement for mobile 
services) and, if so, what safe harbors would be appropriate. If 
commenters support safe harbors other than those listed above, they 
should discuss what other safe harbors should be adopted.
    96. The Commission also seeks comment on distinct issues raised by 
applying this proposal to new potential broadcast use of the spectrum. 
Broadcast permittees operating pursuant to part 73 are required to 
construct their facilities within three years.\46\ The Commission 
requests comment on whether there are any reasons not to apply these 
rules to new broadcasters on these bands. Further, the Commission seeks 
comment on whether to adopt a substantial service test for broadcasters 
operating on this band and, if so, what safe harbors would be 
appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ See 47 CFR 73.3598.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

g. Disaggregation and Partitioning of Spectrum
    97. In the Upper 700 MHz First Report and Order, the Commission 
provided licensees in the 746-764 MHz and 776-794 MHz bands flexibility 
by permitting geographic partitioning of any service area defined by 
the partitioner and partitionee and spectrum disaggregation without 
restriction on the amount of spectrum to be disaggregated. The 
Commission tentatively concludes that the Commission also should permit 
licensees in the 698-746 MHz band to partition and disaggregate their 
licenses. The Commission tentatively concludes that geographic 
partitioning and spectrum disaggregation can result in efficient 
spectrum use and economic opportunity for a wide variety of applicants, 
including small business, rural telephone, minority-owned, and women-
owned applicants.\47\ The Commission also tentatively concludes that 
this approach will provide a means to overcome entry barriers through 
the creation of smaller licenses that require

[[Page 19122]]

less capital, thereby facilitating greater participation by rural 
telephone companies and other smaller entities, many of which are owned 
by minorities and women. The Commission seeks comment on each of these 
matters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ See 47 U.S.C. 309(j)(4)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    98. Section 27.15 of the Commission's rules \48\ permits licensees 
seeking approval for partitioning and disaggregation arrangements to 
request authorization from the Commission for partial assignment of a 
license, and provides that licensees may apply to partition their 
licensed geographic service areas or disaggregate their licensed 
spectrum at any time following the grant of their licenses. In the 
Upper 700 MHz First Report and Order, the Commission decided to permit 
geographic partitioning of any service area defined by the partitioner 
and partitionee, to permit spectrum disaggregation without restriction 
on the amount of spectrum to be disaggregated, and to permit combined 
partitioning and disaggregation. Pursuant to Sec. 27.15, the 
partitioning licensee must include with its request a description of 
the partitioned service area and calculations of the population of the 
partitioned service area and the licensed geographic service area.\49\ 
Licenses that partition and disaggregate also are subject to the 
provisions against unjust enrichment set forth in Sec. 27.15(c).\50\ 
The Commission requests comment on whether licensees in the 698-746 MHz 
band should be eligible to partition service areas and disaggregate 
spectrum to the same extent that licensees in the 746-764 MHz and 776-
794 MHz bands are permitted to do so. The Commission also requests 
comment on what limits, if any, should be placed on the ability of 
licensees to partition service areas and disaggregate spectrum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ See 47 CFR 27.15.
    \49\ See 47 CFR 27.15(b)(1).
    \50\ Id. at 27.15(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    99. The Commission also proposes to adopt the methods that the 
Commission adopted in the Upper 700 MHz First Report and Order for 
parties to partitioning, disaggregation, or combined partitioning and 
disaggregation agreements to meet construction requirements. 
Specifically, the Commission proposes that parties to partitioning 
agreements be permitted to choose between two options for satisfying 
the construction requirements. Under the first option, the partitioner 
and partitionee would each certify that it will independently satisfy 
the substantial service requirement for its respective partitioned 
area. If a licensee fails to meet its substantial service requirement 
during the relevant license term, the non-performing licensee's 
authorization would be subject to cancellation at the end of the 
license term. Under the second option, the partitioner certifies that 
the requirement has been or will be met for the entire market. If the 
partitioner fails to meet the substantial service standard during the 
relevant license term, only its license would be subject to 
cancellation at the end of the license term. The partitionee's license 
would not be affected by such failure.
    100. Finally, the Commission proposes to allow parties to 
disaggregation agreements to choose between two options for satisfying 
the construction requirements. Under the first option, the 
disaggregator and disaggregatee would certify that they will share 
responsibility for meeting the substantial service requirement for the 
geographic service area. If parties choose this option, both parties' 
performance will be evaluated at the end of the relevant license term 
and both licenses could be subject to cancellation. The second option 
would allow the parties to agree that either the disaggregator or the 
disaggregatee would be responsible for meeting the substantial service 
requirement for the geographic service area. If parties choose this 
option, and the party responsible for meeting the construction 
requirement fails to do so, only the license of the non-performing 
party would be subject to cancellation.
4. Operating Rules
    101. In the Upper 700 MHz First Report and Order, the Commission 
decided that licensees in the 747-762 MHz and 777-792 MHz bands would 
be subject to the operational rules contained in part 27 that govern 
operations, modified to accommodate the particular circumstances of the 
Upper 700 MHz proceeding. The Commission seeks comment generally on the 
applicability of these rules to the 698-746 MHz band and whether any 
operating rules contained in other parts of the Commission's rules 
should be adopted for the 698-746 MHz band. In addition, the Commission 
asks commenters to suggest any alternatives to such regulations 
governing a licensee's operations in order to minimize the potential 
significant economic impact, if any, from such rules on small entities.
a. Forbearance
    102. The Commission seeks comment on whether to consider 
forbearance initiatives that are targeted specifically to new licensees 
that will operate in the Lower 700 MHz Band. Commenters should address 
how forbearance might apply to the various services that might be 
offered in the Lower 700 MHz Band, including CMRS, fixed wireless and 
new broadcast-type service.
b. Equal Employment Opportunity
    103. The Commission tentatively concludes that for the Lower 700 
MHz Band an applicant's EEO requirements will be determined by the type 
of service an applicant chooses to provide. The Commission seeks 
comment on this matter.
5. Competitive Bidding Procedures
    104. Section 309(j)(14)(C) requires the Commission to assign 
licenses for the 698-746 MHz band by means of the competitive bidding 
procedures adopted pursuant to section 309(j) of the Act. Consistent 
with that directive, the Commission requests comment on a number of 
issues relating to the competitive bidding procedures for the 698-746 
MHz band.
a. Incorporation by Reference of the Part 1 Standardized Auction Rules
    105. The Commission proposes to conduct the auction of initial 
licenses in the 698-746 MHz band in conformity with the general 
competitive bidding rules set forth in part 1, subpart Q, of the 
Commission's rules, and substantially consistent with the bidding 
procedures that have been employed in previous auctions.\51\ 
Specifically, the Commission proposes to employ the part 1 rules 
governing competitive bidding design, designated entities, application 
and payment procedures, reporting requirements, collusion issues, and 
unjust enrichment. Under this proposal, such rules would be subject to 
any modifications that the Commission may adopt in the part 1 
proceeding. In addition, consistent with current practice, matters such 
as the appropriate competitive bidding design for the auction of 698-
746 MHz band licenses, as well as minimum opening bids and reserve 
prices, would be determined by the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau 
pursuant to its delegated authority, see Part 1 Third Report and Order, 
63 FR 770, January 7, 1998, 63 FR 2315, January 15, 1998 corrected by 
63 FR 12658, March 16, 1998. The Commission seeks comment on whether 
any of the part 1 rules would be inappropriate in an auction of 
licenses in the 698-746 MHz band.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ See 47 CFR 1.2101 et seq. (Part 1, Subpart Q).

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

[[Page 19123]]

b. Provisions for Designated Entities
    106. In authorizing the Commission to use competitive bidding, 
Congress mandated that the Commission ``ensure that small businesses, 
rural telephone companies, and businesses owned by members of minority 
groups and women are given the opportunity to participate in the 
provision of spectrum-based services.'' \52\ In addition, section 
309(j)(3)(B) of the Act provides that in establishing eligibility 
criteria and bidding methodologies the Commission shall promote 
``economic opportunity and competition * * * by avoiding excessive 
concentration of licenses and by disseminating licenses among a wide 
variety of applicants, including small businesses, rural telephone 
companies, and businesses owned by members of minority groups and 
women.'' \53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ See 47 U.S.C. 309)(j)(4)(D).
    \53\ See id. 309(j)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    107. The Commission's designated entity preferences apply based on 
an entity's qualification as a small business.\54\ The Commission notes 
that minority- and women-owned businesses and rural telephone companies 
that qualify as small businesses may take advantage of the special 
provisions the Commission has adopted for small businesses. The 
Commission tentatively concludes that the small business provisions are 
sufficient to promote participation by businesses owned by minorities 
and women, as well as rural telephone companies. To the extent that 
commenters propose additional provisions to ensure participation by 
minority- or women-owned businesses, they should address how such 
provisions should be crafted to meet the relevant constitutional 
standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ See 47 CFR 1.2110(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    108. The Commission seeks comment on the appropriate definitions of 
small businesses that should be used to determine eligibility for 
bidding credits in the 698-746 MHz band. In the Competitive Bidding 
Second Memorandum Opinion and Order, 59 FR 44272, August 26, 1994, the 
Commission stated that it would define eligibility requirements for 
small businesses on a service-specific basis, taking into account the 
capital requirements and other characteristics of each particular 
service in establishing the appropriate threshold. The Part 1 Third 
Report and Order, while it standardizes many auction rules, provides 
that the Commission will continue a service-by-service approach to 
defining small businesses.
    109. The Commission proposes to apply the same small business 
definitions here that the Commission adopted for the Upper 700 MHz 
Band. In the Upper 700 MHz First Report and Order, the Commission 
defined a ``small business'' as an entity with average annual gross 
revenues for the preceding three years not exceeding $40 million, and a 
``very small business'' as an entity with average annual gross revenues 
for the preceding three years not exceeding $15 million.\55\ The 
Commission believes the services that will be deployed in this band 
will have similar capital requirements to the commercial services in 
the Upper 700 MHz Band, and thus the same small business definitions 
should apply. The Commission believes that new licensees both in this 
band and the Upper 700 MHz Band may be presented with similar issues 
and costs, including those involved in relocating incumbents and 
developing markets, technologies, and services. The Commission invites 
comment on this analysis. In further support of the proposed 
definitions, the Commission notes that a majority of winning bidders in 
the auctions for licenses in the Upper 700 MHz guard bands claimed 
eligibility as small businesses. These results appear to confirm the 
belief, as stated in the Upper 700 MHz First Report and Order, that 
``these two definitions will provide businesses seeking to provide a 
variety of services with opportunities to participate in the auction of 
licenses for this spectrum.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ See 47 CFR 27.502(a)(1)-(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    110. Commenters proposing alternative standards should give careful 
consideration to the likely capital requirements for developing 
services in this spectrum. For example, interested parties should 
consider the impact of the band plan on small business size standards. 
In this regard, the Commission seeks comment on whether the band plan 
or any other factors that might have an impact on capital requirements 
warrant the adoption of an additional definition for entities with 
average annual gross revenues for the three preceding years of not more 
than $3 million. Commenters should also consider whether the band plan 
and characteristics of the Lower 700 MHz Band suggest that the adoption 
of small business size definitions and the use of bidding credits would 
be inappropriate in this instance.
    111. In the Part 1 Third Report and Order, the Commission adopted a 
standard schedule of bidding credits for certain small business 
definitions, the levels of which were developed based on the auction 
experience. The standard schedule may be found at Sec. 1.2110(f)(2) of 
the Commission's rules.\56\ The Commission continues to believe that 
these levels of bidding credits will provide adequate opportunities for 
small businesses of varying sizes to participate in spectrum auctions. 
Assuming that the Commission adopts the proposal to define for the 
services in this band a ``small business'' as an entity with average 
annual gross revenues for the preceding three years not exceeding $40 
million, and a ``very small business'' as an entity with average annual 
gross revenues for the preceding three years not exceeding $15 million, 
the Commission proposes to provide qualifying ``small businesses'' with 
a bidding credit of 15% and ``very small businesses'' a 25% bidding 
credit, consistent with Sec. 1.2110(f)(2).\57\ The Commission seeks 
comment on this proposal. The Commission also seeks comment on whether, 
if the Commission adopts a third small business definition for entities 
with average annual gross revenues of not more than $3 million for the 
past three years, the 35% bidding credit set out in 
Sec. 1.2110(f)(2)(i) should be made available to such entities.\58\ 
Finally, the Commission invites comment on whether there may be any 
distinctive characteristics to this band that might suggest a more 
limited use of bidding credits here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ See 47 CFR 1.2110(f)(2).
    \57\ 47 CFR 1.2110(f)(2)(ii) and (iii).
    \58\ Id at 1.2110(f)(2)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Public Notice of Initial Applications/Petitions To Deny
    112. Section 309(b) and section 309(c) of the Communications Act 
require public notice for initial applications, and substantial 
amendments thereof.\59\ These requirements provide that no such 
application shall be granted earlier than 30 days following the 
issuance of public notice by the Commission, and that the Commission 
may not require petitions to deny such applications to be filed earlier 
than 30 days following the public notice. The same provision also 
grants the Commission the authority to impose public notice 
requirements for other licenses, even though the statute does not 
require public notice. However, the administrative procedures for 
spectrum auctions adopted in section 3008 of the BBA 97 \60\ and 
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2000, permit the Commission to shorten 
notice periods in the auction context to five days for petitions to 
deny and seven days for public notice, notwithstanding the provisions 
of section 309(b) of the Communications Act. In the Part 1 Third Report 
and Order, the

[[Page 19124]]

Commission exercised this statutory authority by amending 
Secs. 1.2108(b) and 1.2108(c) of the Commission's rules to provide for 
a five-day period for filing petitions to deny and a seven-day public 
notice period for all auctionable services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ 47 U.S.C. 309(b) and (c).
    \60\ Id. at 309(j) note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    113. In the Upper 700 MHz First Report and Order, the Commission 
adopted the seven-day notice requirement for initial applications and 
the five-day deadline for petitions to deny. The Commission also 
determined that an applicant filing for both common carrier and non-
common carrier authorizations in a single license and wishing to make 
subsequent status changes will be subject to the seven-day public 
notice requirement. The Commission tentatively concludes in the Notice 
that services in the 698-746 MHz spectrum will be auctionable services. 
Therefore, the Commission proposes that a seven-day notice period for 
initial applications and a five-day deadline for petitions to deny 
would be applicable. The Commission requests comments on this proposal 
and whether longer periods should apply for some services. Commenters 
should address whether imposing the proposed seven-day notice 
requirement and five-day petition to deny period would be an undue 
burden on parties, and whether it would be administratively useful by 
enabling us to ensure that any applicant filing for both common carrier 
and non-common carrier authorizations in a single license is in 
compliance with (1) the licensing requirements for common carriers and 
broadcasters established in Title III of the Communications Act; and 
(2) any related requirements the Commission may adopt. Commenters also 
should address whether to allow all licensees to make subsequent status 
changes under reduced notification requirements.
6. Possible Measures To Facilitate Clearing of 698-746 MHz Band and 
Accelerate DTV Transition
    114. The 698-746 MHz band at issue here has historically been used 
exclusively by television stations (Channels 52-59). In developing the 
DTV transition plan, the Commission announced its belief that ``the 
recovery of spectrum continue[s] to be a key component of the 
implementation of DTV service. In this regard, the Commission remains 
committed to the recovery of the channels temporarily assigned for the 
transition and to ensuring that the spectrum is used efficiently.'' The 
Commission also announced that the DTV transition plan would ``permit 
the eventual recovery'' of additional spectrum nationwide while 
minimizing disruptions to broadcasters, and identified only the 
Channels 60-69 portion of the spectrum for ``early recovery,'' noting 
that under the plan ``it may be possible to recover 60 MHz of spectrum 
almost immediately from the band 746-806 MHz, i.e., UHF Channels 60-69, 
while protecting the relatively few full-service analog and digital 
broadcasters in that spectrum.'' The incumbent television broadcasters 
are permitted by statute to continue operations until their markets are 
converted to DTV,\61\ which is not scheduled to occur until December 
31, 2006, and that date may be extended under certain 
circumstances.\62\ Congress has, however, directed the Commission to 
commence competitive bidding for licenses to use the lower 700 MHz 
spectrum well before the scheduled termination date of the DTV 
transition.\63\ Thus, in the event that the Commission decides to 
reallocate this spectrum, the Commission will be faced with a situation 
that is in many respects similar to that which the Commission has 
recently addressed in regard to the Upper 700 MHz Band, which is 
currently used by Channels 60-69. In the Upper 700 MHz proceeding, the 
Commission announced policies and adopted mechanisms to facilitate the 
voluntary clearing of the 740-806 MHz band to allow for the 
introduction of new wireless services, and to promote the early 
transition of analog television licensees to DTV. The Commission 
solicits comment as to the band clearing mechanisms and policies that 
would be appropriate for the 698-746 MHz band.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \61\ See 47 U.S.C. 309(j)(14).
    \62\ See id.
    \63\ See id. at 309(j)(14)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    115. With respect to the Upper 700 MHz Band, the Commission adopted 
rules and policies that allow the private sector to determine the band-
clearing mechanisms that will best suit broadcasters' and potential new 
700 MHz licensees' needs. In the Upper 700 MHz Third Report and Order, 
the Commission announced the intention to rely upon voluntary band 
clearing agreements among incumbent broadcasters and new Upper 700 MHz 
licensees to open that band to new uses and accelerate the transition 
to DTV. In so doing, the Commission was guided by the conclusion in the 
Spectrum Reallocation Policy Statement that a flexible, market-based 
approach is the most appropriate method for establishing service rules 
for this band. Here, the Commission proposes to extend the rules and 
policies adopted in the Upper 700 MHz proceeding to voluntary clearing 
of the 698-746 MHz spectrum, and seek comment on this proposal.
    116. Incumbent full-power broadcast stations are entitled to 
interference protection throughout the DTV transition. The Commission 
acknowledges that, as a practical matter, it may be difficult to 
identify vacant allotments into which broadcasters may feasibly 
relocate, particularly in light of the larger number of incumbent 
analog and DTV stations on the Lower 700 MHz Band than on the Upper 700 
MHz Band. In the later stages of the DTV transition, however, the 
Commission expect that such opportunities will increase as other 
broadcasters begin to surrender analog allotments (consistent with the 
policies the Commission adopted in the Upper 700 MHz Third Report and 
Order) and the DTV transition and band clearing processes gain 
momentum. The Commission seeks comment as to whether any particular 
characteristics of broadcast operations on the Lower 700 MHz Band may 
make it more difficult to clear this spectrum when compared with the 
Upper 700 MHz Band. In addition, the Commission poses a number of 
questions on issues relating to band clearing that are designed to 
elicit comment on whether the policies adopted in the Upper 700 MHz 
proceeding should be extended to the 698-746 MHz spectrum.
a. Voluntary Transition Agreements
    117. In the Upper 700 MHz proceeding, the Commission adopted 
certain policies regarding the Commission's review of regulatory 
requests submitted in connection with voluntary clearing agreements 
that are intended to facilitate clearing and streamline the review 
process. Among these policies were a general presumption, standards of 
review, and procedural policies concerning bilateral and three-way 
agreements. Under bilateral agreements, broadcasters might relinquish 
one of their two television allotments for use by new wireless 
licensees. Three-way clearing agreements would provide for TV 
incumbents on television Channels 52-69 to relocate to lower band TV 
channels that, in turn, would be voluntarily cleared by the lower band 
TV incumbents.
    118. In the Upper 700 MHz proceeding, the Commission stated that it 
generally does not intend to review the wisdom of private parties' 
business decisions in reaching agreements, and that the role would be 
limited to weighing the effect on the public interest of regulatory 
requests made in connection with such agreements. With respect to the 
review of such regulatory

[[Page 19125]]

requests, the Commission established a rebuttable presumption that, in 
certain circumstances, substantial public interest benefits will arise 
from a voluntary agreement between a 700 MHz licensee and an incumbent 
broadcast licensee on Channels 59-69 that clears the Upper 700 MHz Band 
of incumbent television licensee(s). The Commission stated that it 
would presume that the public interest is substantially furthered when 
an applicant demonstrates that the grant of its request will both 
result in certain specific benefits and avoid specific detriments. In 
particular, to obtain this presumption, an applicant must first 
demonstrate that grant of its request would result in one of the 
following: (1) Make new or expanded wireless service, such as ``2.5G'' 
or ``3G'' services, available to consumers; (2) clear commercial 
frequencies that enable provision of public safety services; or (3) 
result in the provision of wireless service to rural or other 
underserved communities. To obtain the presumption, the applicant must 
also show that grant of its request would not result in any one of the 
following: (1) the loss of any of the stations in the designated market 
area with the largest audience share; (2) the loss of the sole service 
licensed to the local community; or (3) the loss of a community's sole 
service on a channel reserved for noncommercial educational broadcast 
service. However, this presumption is not conclusive or dispositive. 
When the presumption is not established or is rebutted, the Commission 
will review regulatory requests by weighing the loss of service and the 
advent of new wireless service on a case-by-case basis. In addition, 
the Commission adopted various procedural changes in order to 
streamline the process of reviewing regulatory requests that are 
necessary to effectuate private band-clearing agreements, and affirmed 
the commitment to process regulatory requests associated with 
relocation agreements expeditiously.
    119. The Commission proposes to extend these policies to band 
clearing agreements involving broadcasters in the 698-740 MHz band. The 
Commission seeks comment on this proposal. The Commission also requests 
input as to whether the streamlined procedural policies could be 
improved to facilitate such agreements. While the Commission does not 
intend to entertain collateral attacks on the Upper 700 MHz policy, the 
Commission invites commenters to explain any particular differences 
about Channels 52-58, such as the impact that the greater numbers of 
broadcast incumbents may have on the recovery of this band, which may 
warrant a change from the policy with regard to the voluntary band 
clearing agreements for Channels 59-69.
b. Secondary Auctions
    120. A secondary band clearing auction would be a mechanism to 
determine the price that would be paid by new licensees to TV 
incumbents who agree to clear their channels. The Commission recognized 
in the Upper 700 MHz proceeding that a secondary auction mechanism may 
produce significant benefits. The Commission proposes here to leave any 
such auction to private, voluntary efforts that are otherwise 
consistent with the stated policies and do not interfere with the 
proper functioning of the Commission's spectrum auction processes. The 
proposal is based on the belief that, as the Commission stated in the 
Upper 700 MHz Third Report and Order, ``the private sector is better 
suited to determine what mechanisms interested parties might demand and 
to implement a secondary auction in a manner that is most responsive to 
broadcasters' and potential bidders' needs.''
    121. The Commission seeks comment on all aspects of this approach. 
In this regard, the Commission invites commenters to identify any 
existing regulations or policies that may unnecessarily restrict the 
operation of such private, voluntary band clearing mechanisms.
c. Additional Proposals To Facilitate Band Clearing Accelerate the 
Digital Television Transition
    122. In the Upper 700 MHz proceeding, the Commission solicited 
ideas on additional proposals that might accelerate the DTV transition. 
A number of commenters used that opportunity to request relief on a 
number of issues related to the DTV transition, such as urging the 
adoption of DTV must-carry rules, in order to encourage clearing. To 
the extent that these issues are before the Commission in separate 
proceedings, they will not be addressed here. As the Commission did in 
the Upper 700 MHz proceeding, the Commission invites comment on other 
related proposals to facilitate band clearing and expedite the DTV 
transition, such as the possible use of cost-sharing rules, cost 
recovery limitations, or band sharing. The Commission notes that 
financial payments to cable operators or satellite carriers for the 
voluntary carriage of broadcast signals might facilitate clearance of 
the band on a more rapid basis.
    123. Cost-Sharing Rules and Limitations on Cost Recovery. While the 
Commission has at times relied on cost-sharing rules and limitations on 
cost recovery to assist in clearing other bands so as to enable faster 
deployment of new services, in the Upper 700 MHz Third Report and 
Order, the Commission concluded that it would not be necessary or 
appropriate to adopt cost-sharing rules or caps on clearing costs. The 
Commission tentatively concludes that the Commission should similarly 
rely on market forces to apportion all costs to facilitate clearing of 
the 698-746 MHz band, and that limitations on the recovery of such 
costs would not be appropriate at this time. The Commission seeks 
comment on this tentative conclusion and on whether to consider other 
alternative approaches.
    124. Spectrum Sharing and Other Proposals to Facilitate Early 
Transition. In the Upper 700 MHz MO&O and FNPRM, the Commission sought 
comment on two additional proposals to accelerate the digital 
television transition: sharing of the 700 MHz spectrum between 
broadcasters and new wireless licensees, and sharing between 
broadcasters during the transition. The Commission received no comments 
on the possible sharing of 700 MHz spectrum between incumbent 
broadcasters and new licensees, and one comment in support of sharing 
by a broadcaster of another television station's digital spectrum under 
certain circumstances.
    125. In this regard, the Commission seeks comment as to whether the 
Commission should allow incumbent broadcasters and new service 
providers to share spectrum in time and/or bits, provided such 
arrangements are otherwise consistent with the objectives of this 
proceeding and the DTV transition. This proposal would preserve 
broadcast service while also providing opportunity for new service 
providers to commence service. In addition, sharing arrangements may 
assist broadcasters in rapidly transitioning to digital service. 
Similarly, the Commission requests comment on whether to permit 
broadcasters to share DTV facilities and spectrum during the 
transition. This proposal may facilitate clearing of in-core channels 
for relocation of television operations on out-of-core channels.

[[Page 19126]]

IV. Procedural Matters

A. Ex Parte Rules--Permit-But-Disclose

    126. This is a permit-but-disclose notice and comment rulemaking 
proceeding. Ex parte presentations are permitted, except during the 
Sunshine Agenda period, provided they are disclosed pursuant to the 
Commission's rules.\64\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \64\ See generally 47 CFR 1.1202, 1.1206.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    127. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 
(RFA),\65\ the Commission has prepared an Initial Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact 
on small entities of the policies and rules proposed in the Notice. The 
analysis is found below. The Commission requests written public comment 
on the analysis. Comments must be filed in accordance with the same 
filing deadlines as comments filed in this rulemaking proceeding, and 
must have a separate and distinct heading designating them as responses 
to the IRFA. The Commission's Consumer Information Bureau, Reference 
Information Center, will send a copy of this Notice, including the 
IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \65\ 5 U.S.C. 603.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    128. The Commission has prepared this Initial Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis (``IRFA'') of the possible significant economic 
impact on small entities by the policies and rules proposed in this 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (``Notice''), GN Docket No. 01-74. 
Written public comments are requested on this IRFA. Comments must be 
identified as responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines 
for comments on the Notice as provided above. The Commission will send 
a copy of the Notice, including the IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (``SBA'').\66\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \66\ See U.S.C. 603(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules
    129. The Notice is part of the Commission's plan to reclaim the 
698-746 MHz band (``698-746 MHz band'' or ``Lower 700 MHz Band''), 
currently used for television (``TV'') Channels 52-59, for new 
commercial services as part of the transition of TV broadcasting from 
analog to digital transmission systems, consistent with the statutory 
directives enacted in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997.\67\ The Notice 
consists of two parts. First, the Notice proposes to reallocate the 
698-746 MHz band, currently used for TV Channels 52-59, from use solely 
for broadcast services to Fixed, Mobile, and Broadcast services. 
Second, the Notice proposes to adopt certain service, licensing, and 
competitive bidding rules for the 698-746 MHz band.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \67\ See Balanced Budget Act of 1997, Public Law 105-33, 111 
Stat. 251 (1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    130. The Commission proposes to reallocate the entire 48 megahertz 
of spectrum in the 698-746 MHz band to the fixed and mobile services, 
and retain the existing broadcast allocation. The Commission also seeks 
comment on whether the band should also be allocated for satellite 
services.
    131. The Commission also proposes to license the 698-746 MHz 
commercial band under a flexible framework established in part 27 of 
the Commission's rules. It is expected that provisions of part 27 will 
be modified to reflect the particular characteristics and circumstances 
of services offered through the use of spectrum on these bands. 
Depending on the extent and nature of provisions in the service rules 
that enable broadcast services, these modifications may also reference 
or incorporate rules in other parts of the Commission's Rules, such as 
part 73 governing broadcast services. The Commission believes that this 
flexible approach will encourage new and innovative services and 
technologies in this band without significantly limiting the range of 
potential uses for this spectrum.
    132. The Commission proposes to apply the same small business 
definitions here that the Commission adopted for the Upper 700 MHz 
Band. In particular, the Commission proposes to define a ``small 
business'' as an entity with average annual gross revenues for the 
preceding three years not exceeding $40 million, and a ``very small 
business'' as an entity with average annual gross revenues for the 
preceding three years not exceeding $15 million. The Notice reflects 
the Commission's belief that the services that will be deployed in this 
band will have similar capital requirements to the commercial services 
in the Upper 700 MHz Band, and thus proposes to apply the same small 
business definitions. The Commission also observes that new licensees 
both in this band and the Upper 700 MHz Band may be presented with 
similar issues and costs, including those involved in relocating 
incumbents and developing markets, technologies, and services. The 
Commission also seeks alternative standards proposals, and specifically 
seeks comment on whether to adopt an additional definition for entities 
with average annual gross revenues for the three preceding years of not 
more than $3 million.
    133. Among the principal objectives in this proceeding are: (1) to 
license these commercial spectrum blocks through competitive bidding, 
as directed by the Balanced Budget Act of 1997; (2) to accommodate the 
introduction of new uses of spectrum and the enhancement of existing 
uses; (3) to implement the section 303(y) requirement that flexible use 
allocations not create harmful interference or discourage investment; 
(4) to facilitate the awarding of licenses to entities that value them 
the most. The Commission seeks to develop a regulatory plan for these 
commercial spectrum blocks that will allow for efficient licensing and 
intensive use of the band, eliminate unnecessary regulatory burdens, 
enhance the competitive potential of the band, and provide a wide 
variety of radio services to the public.
2. Legal Basis for Proposed Rules
    134. This action is authorized under sections 1, 2, 4(i), 7, 10, 
201, 202, 208, 214, 301, 302, 303, 307, 308, 309, 310, 311, 316, 319, 
324, 331, 332, 333, 336, 337, 614 and 615 of the Communications Act of 
1934, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 157, 160, 201, 202, 208, 214, 301, 
302a, 303, 307, 308, 309, 310, 311, 316, 319, 324, 331, 332, 333, 336, 
337, 534, 535.
3. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which 
the Proposed Rules Will Apply
    135. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of, and, 
where feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities to which 
the rule will apply or an explanation of why no such estimate is 
available.\68\ The RFA generally defines the term ``small entity'' as 
having the same meaning as the terms ``small business,'' ``small 
organization,'' and ``small governmental jurisdiction'' under section 3 
of the Small Business Act.\69\ In addition, the term ``small business'' 
has the same meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the 
Small Business Act.\70\ Under the Small Business Act, a ``small 
business concern'' is one which:

[[Page 19127]]

(1) is independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its 
field of operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria 
established by the SBA.\71\ According to SBA reporting data, there were 
approximately 4.44 million small business firms nationwide in 1992.\72\ 
A small organization is generally ``any not-for-profit enterprise which 
is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.'' 
\73\ Nationwide, as of 1992, there were approximately 275,801 small 
organizations.\74\ ``Small governmental jurisdiction'' generally means 
``governments of cities, counties, towns, townships, villages, school 
districts, or special districts, with a population of less than 
50,000.'' \75\ As of 1992, there were approximately 85,006 local 
governments in the United States.\76\ This number includes 38,978 
counties, cities, and towns; of these, 37,566, or 96 percent, have 
populations of fewer than 50,000.\77\ The Census Bureau estimates that 
this ratio is approximately accurate for all governmental entities. 
Thus, of the 85,006 governmental entities, the Commission estimates 
that 81,600 (96 percent) are small entities. Below, the Commission 
further describes and estimates the number of small entity licensees 
and regulatees that may be affected by the proposed rules, if adopted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \68\ See 5 U.S.C. 604(a)(3).
    \69\ See id. 601(6).
    \70\ See id. 601(3) (incorporating by reference the definition 
of ``small business concern'' in 15 U.S.C. 632). Pursuant to 5 
U.S.C. 601(3), the statutory definition of a small business applies 
``unless an agency after consultation with the Office of Advocacy of 
the Small Business Administration and after opportunity for public 
comment, establishes one or more definitions of such term which are 
appropriate to the activities of the agency and publishes such 
definitions(s) in the Federal Register.
    \71\ See 15 U.S.C. 632.
    \72\ See 1992 Economic Census, U.S. Bureau of the Census, Table 
6 (special tabulation of data under contract to Office of Advocacy 
of the U.S. Small Business Administration).
    \73\ See 5 U.S.C. 601(4).
    \74\ See 1992 Economic Census, U.S. Bureau of the Census, Table 
6.
    \75\ See 5 U.S.C. 601(5).
    \76\ See U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, ``1992 
Census of Governments.''
    \77\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    136. The proposals in the Notice affect applicants who wish to 
provide services in the 698-746 MHz band. The Commission proposes to 
apply the same small business definitions here that the Commission 
adopted for the Upper 700 MHz Band. In particular, the Commission 
proposes to define a ``small business'' as an entity with average 
annual gross revenues for the preceding three years not exceeding $40 
million, and a ``very small business'' as an entity with average annual 
gross revenues for the preceding three years not exceeding $15 
million.\78\ The Notice reflects the Commission's belief that the 
services that will be deployed in this band will have similar capital 
requirements to the commercial services in the Upper 700 MHz Band, and 
thus proposes to apply the same small business definitions. The 
Commission also observes that new licensees both in this band and the 
Upper 700 MHz Band may be presented with similar issues and costs, 
including those involved in relocating incumbents and developing 
markets, technologies, and services. The Commission also seeks 
alternative standards proposals, which consider the impact of the band 
plan on small business size standards. The Commission specifically 
seeks comment on whether to adopt an additional definition for entities 
with average annual gross revenues for the three preceding years of not 
more than $3 million.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \78\ See 47 CFR 27.502(a)(1)-(2). These definitions are 
consistent with the Commission's approach in the broadband PCS 
services. See 47 CFR 24.720(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    137. The Commission used these same small business size definitions 
for Blocks C and F broadband PCS licensees.\79\ This regulation 
defining ``small business'' and ``very small business'' in the context 
of broadband PCS auctions has been approved by the SBA, see Competitive 
Bidding Fifth Report and Order, 59 FR 37566, July 22, 1994. The 
Commission has also adopted this same definition for 746-764 and 776-
794 MHz applicants.\80\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \79\ See 47 CFR 24.720(b).
    \80\ See 47 CFR 27.210(b)(1)-(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    138. The Commission, however, has not yet determined or proposed 
how many licenses will be awarded, nor will it know how many entities 
will seek small business or very small business status until the 
auction process begins. Even after that, the Commission will not know 
how many licensees will partition their license areas or disaggregate 
their spectrum blocks, if partitioning and disaggregation are allowed. 
In view of the lack of knowledge of the entities which will seek 
licenses in the 698-746 MHz band, the Commission therefore assumes 
that, for purposes of the evaluations and conclusions in the IRFA, all 
of the prospective licenses are small entities, as that term is defined 
by the SBA or the proposed definitions for these bands.
    139. Wireless services. The policies and rules proposed in the 
Notice would affect all small entities that seek to acquire licenses in 
wireless services in the Lower 700 MHz Band currently used for 
television broadcasts on Channels 52-58, or are incumbent television 
broadcasters on Channels 52-58. The Commission proposes to use the 
small and very small business size standard adopted in the PCS 
proceeding.\81\ No channelization plan or licensing plan has been 
proposed or adopted for the Lower 700 MHz Band. Therefore, no 
reasonable estimate can be made at this time of the potential number of 
small entities that might become licensees in the Lower 700 MHz Band.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \81\ The Commission notes that the SBA generic size standard 
applicable to Radiotelephone (Wireless) companies provides that a 
small entity is a radiotelephone company employing no more than 
1,500 persons. See 13 CFR 121.201 (NAICS code 513322). According to 
the Bureau of the Census, only 12 radiotelephone firms from a total 
of 1,178 such firms which operated during 1992 had 1,000 or more 
employees. See 1992 Census, Series UC92-S-I, at Table 5 (SIC code 
4812). Therefore, even if all 12 of these firms were wireless 
companies, nearly all wireless carriers were small businesses under 
the SBA's definition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    140. Television Broadcast. The SBA defines a television 
broadcasting station as a small business where it is independently 
owned and operated, is not dominant in its field of operation, and has 
no more than $10.5 million in annual receipts.\82\ Television 
broadcasting stations consist of establishments primarily engaged in 
broadcasting visual programs by television to the public, except cable 
and other pay television services.\83\ Included in this industry are 
commercial, religious, educational, and other television stations.\84\ 
Also included are establishments primarily engaged in television 
broadcasting and which produce taped television program materials.\85\ 
There were 1,509 television stations operating in the nation in 1992, 
of which 1,155 produced less than $10.0 million in revenue (76.5 
percent)\86\ As of May 31, 1998, official Commission records indicate 
that 1,579 full power television stations, 2,089 low power television 
stations, and 4,924 television translator stations were licensed.\87\ 
Using the percentage of television broadcasting licensees that were 
small entities in 1992 (76.5 percent), the Commission concludes that 
there are approximately 1,208 full power television stations that are 
small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \82\ See 13 CFR 121.201 (NAICS code 51312).
    \83\ Economics and Statistics Administraiton, Bureau of Census, 
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1992 Census of Transportation, 
Communications and Utilities, Estabslihment and Firm Size, Series 
UC92-S-1, Appendix A-9 (1995).
    \84\ Id.
    \85\ Id.
    \86\ FCC news Release No. 31327, Jan. 13, 1993: Economics and 
Statistics Administration, Bureau of Census, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, Appendix A-9. The amount of $10 million was used to 
estimate the number of small business establishments because the 
relevant Census categories stopped at $9,999,999 and began at 
$10,000,000. No category for $10.5 million existed. Thus, the number 
is as accurate as it is possible to calculate with the available 
information.
    \87\ FCC News Release, June 19, 1998.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    141. The rules may affect approximately 1,663 television stations, 
approximately 1,281 of which are considered small businesses.\88\ The

[[Page 19128]]

proposed rules will affect some 12,717 radio stations, approximately 
12,209 of which are small businesses.\89\ These estimates may overstate 
the number of small entities because the revenue figures on which they 
are based do not include or aggregate revenues from non-television or 
non-radio affiliated companies. There are also 2,366 LPTV stations.\90\ 
Given the nature of this service, the Commission will presume that all 
LPTV licensees qualify as small entities under the SBA definition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \88\ We use the 77 percent figure of TV stations operating at 
less than $10 million for 1992 and apply it to the 2000 total of 
1,663 TV stations to arrive at 1,281 stations categorized as small 
businesses.
    \89\ We use the 96% figure of radio station establsihments with 
less than $5 million revenue from data presented in the year 2000 
estimate (FCC News Release, September 30, 2000) and apply it to the 
12,717 individual station count to arrive at 12,209 individual 
stations as small businesses.
    \90\ FCC News Release, ``Broadcast Station Totals as of 
September 30, 2000.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    142. Auxiliary or Special Broadcast. This service involves a 
variety of transmitters, generally used to relay broadcast programming 
to the public (through translator and booster stations) or within the 
program distribution chain (from a remote news gathering unit back to 
the station). The Commission has not developed a definition of small 
entities applicable to broadcast auxiliary licensees. The applicable 
SBA definition is that noted previously, under the SBA rules applicable 
to television broadcasting stations.\91\ The Commission estimates that 
there are approximately 2,700 translators and boosters. The FCC does 
not collect financial information on any broadcast facility, and the 
Department of Commerce does not collect financial information on these 
auxiliary broadcast facilities. The Commission believes that most, if 
not all, of these auxiliary facilities could be classified as small 
businesses if viewed apart from any associated broadcasters. The 
Commission also recognizes that most commercial translators and 
boosters are owned by a parent station which, in some cases, would be 
covered by the revenue definition of small business entity discussed 
above. These stations would likely have annual revenues that exceed the 
SBA maximum to be designated as a small business ($10.5 million for a 
TV station). Furthermore, they do not meet the Small Business Act's 
definition of a ``small business concern'' because they are not 
independently owned and operated.\92\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \91\ 13 CFR 121.201 (NAICS code 51312).
    \92\ 15 U.S.C. 632.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    143. The Commission invites comment on this analysis.
4. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other 
Compliance Requirements
    144. Entities interested in acquiring initial licenses to use 
spectrum in the 698-746 MHz band will be required to submit short form 
applications to participate in an auction and high bidders will be 
required to apply for their individual licenses. The proposals under 
consideration in this item also include requiring commercial licenses 
to make showings that they are in compliance with construction 
requirements, file applications for license renewals, and make certain 
other filings as required by the Communications Act and Commission 
regulations. In addition to the general licensing requirements of part 
27 of the Commission's Rules, other parts may be applicable to 
commercial licensees, depending on the nature of service provided. For 
example, commercial licensees proposing to provide broadcast services 
on these bands may be required to comply with all or part of the 
broadcast-specific regulations in part 73 of the Commission's Rules. 
The Commission requests comment on how these requirements can be 
modified to reduce the burden on small entities and still meet the 
objectives of the proceeding.
5. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small 
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered
    145. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant 
alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach, 
which may include the following four alternatives (among others): (1) 
The establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or 
timetables that take into account the resources available to small 
entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of 
compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities; 
(3) the use of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) an 
exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small 
entities.\93\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \93\ 5 U.S.C. 603(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    146. The Commission seeks comment on a number of proposals and 
alternatives regarding the reallocation of, and service rules for, the 
698-746 MHz band. The Commission seeks to adopt rules that will reduce 
regulatory burdens, promote innovative services and encourage flexible 
use of this spectrum. It opens up economic opportunities to a variety 
of spectrum users, including small businesses. The Commission considers 
various proposals and alternatives partly because the Notice seeks to 
minimize, to the extent possible, the economic impact on small 
businesses.
    147. The Commission proposes to reallocate the entire 48 megahertz 
of spectrum in the 698-746 MHz band to the fixed and mobile services, 
and to retain the existing broadcast allocation. The Commission 
tentatively concludes that service rules for this band should implement 
flexible use for the full range of proposed allocated services 
consistent with necessary interference requirements. The Commission 
seeks comment on how this approach will impact small entities.
    148. The Commission seeks comment on various alternative licensing 
and service rules. The Commission seeks comment on a number of issues 
relating to how the Commission should craft service rules for this 
spectrum, that could have an impact on small entities. With respect to 
the size of spectrum blocks for licensees, the Commission seeks comment 
on whether to license the spectrum as a single 48 megahertz block or as 
two or more blocks, and how the size of spectrum blocks would impact 
small entities. With respect to service areas, the Commission proposes 
a geographic area approach and seek comment on the appropriate size of 
service areas. The Commission asks for comment on whether smaller 
geographic areas would better serve the needs of small entities. The 
Commission proposes to permit geographic partitioning and spectrum 
disaggregation, which promotes efficient spectrum use and economic 
opportunity for small business entities. The Commission also seeks 
comment on whether to permit licensees to lease their licensed spectrum 
usage rights. Spectrum leasing could benefit small businesses because 
many different types of spectrum users (including small businesses) 
would be permitted to satisfy their spectrum needs without having to 
acquire a license or go through the Commission's procedures for 
assigning or transferring control of a license or a partial license 
through partitioning, disaggregation, or partial assignment. With 
respect to spectrum aggregation, the Commission seeks comment on 
whether to abstain from counting the 698-746 MHz band against the 
Commercial Mobile Radio Services (``CMRS'') spectrum cap, and how this 
would impact the marketplace, which includes the impact on small 
entities.
    149. The Commission proposes the small business definitions for 
bidders in auctions of licenses in the counting the 698-746 MHz band: a 
``small business''

[[Page 19129]]

would be defined as an entity with average annual gross revenues for 
the three preceding years not exceeding $40 million, and a ``very small 
business'' would be defined as an entity with average annual gross 
revenues for the three preceding years not exceeding $15 million. As 
discussed previously, these definitions are consistent with the 
definitions the Commission applied to broadband PCS and the Upper 700 
MHz Band. The Commission has also sought comment on whether alternative 
approaches may be appropriate in light of the particular 
characteristics of this band. For example, the Commission seeks comment 
on whether to adopt an additional definition for entities with average 
annual gross revenues for the three preceding years of not more than $3 
million. The Commission also proposes to provide qualifying ``small 
businesses'' that participate in an auction with a bidding credit of 
15%, and ``very small businesses'' with a 25% bidding credit. The 
Commission has previously found that bidding credits provide adequate 
opportunities for small businesses of varying sizes to participate in 
spectrum auctions. The Commission also seeks comment on whether, if the 
Commission adopts a third small business definition for entities with 
average annual gross revenues of not more than $3 million for the past 
three years, the 35% bidding credit set out in Sec. 1.2110(f)(2)(i) 
should be made available to such entities. In addition, small business 
may combine any additional tribal lands bidding credits pursuant to 
Sec. 1.2110(f)(3) of the rules with the proposed small business bidding 
credits.
    150. The regulatory burdens contained in the Notice, such as filing 
applications on appropriate forms, are necessary in order to ensure 
that the public receives the benefits of innovative new services, or 
enhanced existing services, in a prompt and efficient manner. The 
Commission will continue to examine alternatives in the future with the 
objectives of eliminating unnecessary regulations and minimizing any 
significant economic impact on small entities. The Commission seeks 
comment on significant alternatives that commenters believe should be 
adopted.
6. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the 
Proposed Rules
    151. None.

C. Initial Paperwork Reduction Analysis

    152. The Notice may contain a proposed information collection. As 
part of the continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, the Notice 
invites the general public and the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) to take this opportunity to comment on the information 
collections contained in this Notice, as required by the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995.\94\ Public and agency comments are due at the 
same time as other comments on this Notice; OMB comments are due June 
12, 2001. Comments should address: (a) Whether the proposed collection 
of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions 
of the Commission, including whether the information shall have 
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden 
estimates; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the 
information collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the 
collection of information on the respondents, including the use of 
automated collection techniques or other forms of information 
technology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \94\ Public Law 104-13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    153. Written comments by the public on the proposed information 
collections are due May 14, 2001. Written comments must be submitted by 
the OMB on the proposed and/or modified information collections on or 
before June 12, 2001. In addition to filing comments with the 
Secretary, a copy of any comments on the information collections 
contained herein should be submitted to Judy Boley, Federal 
Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Room 1-C804, 
Washington, DC 20554, or via the Internet to [email protected], and to 
Edward C. Springer, OMB Desk Officer, 10236 New Executive Office 
Building, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503 or via the 
Internet to [email protected].

D. Comment Period and Procedures

    154. Pursuant to applicable procedures set forth in sections 1.415 
and 1.419 of the Commission's Rules,\95\ interested parties may file 
comments on this Notice on or before May 14, 2001 and reply comments on 
or before June 4, 2001. Comments and reply comments should be filed in 
GN Docket No. 01-74, and may be filed using the Commission's Electronic 
Comment Filing System (ECFS) or by filing paper copies, see Electronic 
Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121, May 1, 
1998. All relevant and timely comments will be considered by the 
Commission before final action is taken in this proceeding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \95\ 47 CFR 1.415, 1.419.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    155. Comments filed through the ECFS can be sent as an electronic 
file via the Internet to http://www.fcc.gov/e-file/ecfs.html>. 
Generally, only one copy of an electronic submission must be filed. 
However, if multiple docket or rulemaking numbers appear in the caption 
of this proceeding, commenters must transmit one electronic copy of the 
comments for each docket or rulemaking number referenced in the 
caption. In completing the transmittal screen, commenters should 
include their full name, Postal Service mailing address, and the 
applicable docket or rulemaking number. Parties may also submit an 
electronic comment by e-mail via the Internet. To obtain filing 
instructions for e-mail comments, commenters should send an e-mail to 
[email protected], and should include the following words in the body of the 
message: ``get form ythe e-mail address>.'' A sample form and 
directions will be sent in reply.
    156. Parties who choose to file by paper must file an original and 
the copies of each filing. If more than one docket or rulemaking number 
appears in the caption of this proceeding, commenters must submit two 
additional copies for each additional docket or rulemaking number. If 
parties want each Commissioner to receive a personal copy of their 
comments, they must file an original plus nine copies. All filings must 
be sent to the Commission's Secretary, Magalie Roman Salas, Office of 
the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., 
Room TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554. Furthermore, parties are requested 
to provide courtesy copies for the following Commission staff: (1) Lisa 
Gaisford, Office of Engineering and Technology, Federal Communications 
Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Room. 7-C115, Washington, DC 20554; 
and (2) G. William Stafford, Commercial Wireless Division, Wireless 
Telecommunications Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th 
Street, SW., Room. 4-B455, Washington, DC 20554. One copy of each 
filing (together with a diskette copy, as indicated below) should also 
be sent to the Commission's copy contractor, International 
Transcription Service, Inc., (ITS, Inc.), 1231 20th Street, NW., 
Washington, DC 20036.
    157. Parties who choose to file by paper should also submit their 
comments on diskette. These diskettes should be attached to the 
original paper filing submitted to the Office of the Secretary. Such a 
submission should be on a 3.5 inch diskette formatted in an IBM 
compatible format using MicrosoftTM Word 97 for Windows or 
compatible software. The diskette should be accompanied by a cover 
letter and should be submitted in ``read only''

[[Page 19130]]

mode. The diskette should be clearly labeled with the commenter's name, 
proceeding, type of pleading (comment or reply comment), date of 
submission, and the name of the electronic file on the diskette. The 
label should also include the following phrase ``Disk Copy--Not an 
Original.'' Each diskette should contain only one party's pleadings, 
preferably in a single electronic file. In addition, commenters should 
send diskette copies to the Commission's copy contractor, ITS, Inc., 
1231 20th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20036.
    158. The public may view the documents filed in this proceeding 
during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, 
Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-A257, 
Washington, DC 20554, and on the Commission's Internet Home Page: 
http://www.fcc.gov. Copies of comments and reply comments are also 
available through the Commission's duplicating contractor: ITS, Inc., 
1231 20th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20036, (202) 857-3800.

E. Further Information

    159. For further information concerning this rulemaking proceeding, 
contact the following for: Allocation Issues: Lisa Gaisford at (202) 
418-7280, Office of Engineering and Technology, Federal Communications 
Commission, Washington, DC 20554; or via the Internet to 
[email protected] Service Rules Issues: G. William Stafford at (202) 
418-0563, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Federal Communications 
Commission, Washington, DC 20554; or via the Internet to 
[email protected].

V. Ordering Clauses

    160. Pursuant to sections 1, 2, 4(i), 7, 10, 201, 202, 208, 214, 
301, 302, 303, 307, 308, 309, 310, 311, 316, 319, 324, 331, 332, 333, 
336, 337, 614 and 615 of the Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. 151, 
152, 154(i), 157, 160, 201, 202, 208, 214, 301, 302a, 303, 307, 308, 
309, 310, 311, 316, 319, 324, 331, 332, 333, 336, 337, 534, 535, that 
this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is hereby Adopted.
    161. Notice is hereby given of the proposed regulatory changes 
described in this Notice, and that comment is sought on these 
proposals.
    162. The Commission's Consumer Information Bureau, Reference 
Information Center, Shall Send a copy of this Notice, including the 
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

List of Subjects

47 CFR Part 2

    Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Telecommunications, 
Television.

47 CFR Part 27

    Communications common carriers, Television.

47 CFR Part 73

    Communications equipment, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Television.

Federal Communications Commission.
Magalie Roman Salas,
Secretary.

Proposed Rule Changes

    In addition to the proposed changes to 47 CFR parts 27 and 73 
discussed in the preamble, part 2 of title 47 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 2--FREQUENCY ALLOCATIONS AND RADIO TREATY MATTERS; GENERAL 
RULES AND REGULATIONS

    1. The authority citation for part 2 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 302a, 303, and 336, unless otherwise 
noted.

    2. Amend Sec. 2.106 as follows:
    a. Revise page 37 of the Table.
    b. In the International Footnotes under heading I., revise 
footnotes S5.293, S5.296, and S5.297.
    c. In the list of Non-Federal Government (NG) Footnotes, revise 
footnotes NG149 and NG159.
    The revisions read as follows:


Sec. 2.106  Table of Frequency Allocations.

* * * * *
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P

[[Page 19131]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP13AP01.025

BILLING CODE 6712-01-C

[[Page 19132]]

* * * * *

International Footnotes

* * * * *

I. New ``S'' Numbering Scheme

* * * * *
    S5.293  Different category of service: in Canada, Chile, 
Colombia, Cuba, the United States, Guyana, Honduras, Jamaica, 
Mexico, Panama and Peru, the allocation of the bands 470-512 MHz and 
614-806 MHz to the fixed and mobile services is on a primary basis 
(see No. S5.33), subject to agreement obtained under No. S9.21. In 
Argentina and Ecuador, the allocation of the band 470-512 MHz to the 
fixed and mobile services is on a primary basis (see No. S5.33), 
subject to agreement obtained under No. S9.21.
* * * * *
    S5.296  Additional allocation: in Germany, Austria, Belgium, 
Cyprus, Denmark, Spain, Finland, France, Ireland, Israel, Italy, 
Libya, Lithuania, Malta, Morocco, Monaco, Norway, the Netherlands, 
Portugal, Syria, the United Kingdom, Sweden, Switzerland, Swaziland 
and Tunisia, the band 470-790 MHz is also allocated on a secondary 
basis to the land mobile service, intended for applications 
ancillary to broadcasting. Stations of the land mobile service in 
the countries listed in this footnote shall not cause harmful 
interference to existing or planned stations operating in accordance 
with the Table in countries other than those listed in this 
footnote.
    S5.297  Additional allocation: in Costa Rica, Cuba, El Salvador, 
the United States, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Jamaica and Mexico, 
the band 512-608 MHz is also allocated to the fixed and mobile 
services on a primary basis, subject to agreement obtained under No. 
S9.21.
* * * * *

Non-Federal Government (NG) Footnotes

* * * * *
    NG149  The frequency bands 54-72 MHz, 76-88 MHz, 174-216 MHz, 
470-512 MHz, 512-608 MHz, and 614-698 MHz are also allocated to the 
fixed service to permit subscription television operations in 
accordance with Part 73 of the rules.
* * * * *
    NG159  Full power analog television stations licensed and new 
digital television (DTV) broadcasting operations in the band 698-806 
MHz shall be entitled to protection from harmful interference until 
the end of the DTV transition period. Low power television and 
television translators in the band 746-806 MHz must cease operations 
in the band at the end of the DTV transition period. Low power 
television and television translators in the band 698-746 MHz are 
secondary to all other operations in the band 698-746 MHz.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 01-9039 Filed 4-12-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P