[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 49 (Thursday, March 13, 2003)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11986-11993]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-6039]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 2 and 25

[ET Docket No. 00-258 and IB Docket No. 99-81; FCC 03-16]


Advanced Wireless Service

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

[[Page 11987]]


ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document reallocate portions of the frequency band 
currently used by the Mobile-Satellite Service (MSS) to provide 
additional spectrum for Fixed and Mobile Services, and deny Cellular 
Telecommunications and Internet Association's petition for 
reconsideration. This action furthers the Commission's efforts to 
identify and reallocate spectrum that can be used to promote the 
development and deployment of advanced wireless services, including 
those commonly associated with ``3G'' wireless applications.

DATES: Effective April 14, 2003.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jamison Prime, Office of Engineering 
and Technology, (202) 418-7474.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Third 
Report and Order and Memorandum Opinion and Order, ET Docket No. 00-258 
and IB Docket No. 99-81, FCC 03-16, adopted January 29, 2003, and 
released February 10, 2003. The full text of this document is available 
for inspection and copying during regular business hours in the FCC 
Reference Center (Room CY-A257), 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20554. The complete text of this document also may be purchased from 
the Commission's copy contractor, Qualex International, 445 12th 
Street, SW., Room, CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554. The full text may 
also be downloaded at: www.fcc.gov. Alternative formats are available 
to persons with disabilities by contacting Brian Millin at (202) 418-
7426 or TTY (202) 418-7365.

Summary of the Third Report and Order and Memorandum Opinion and Order

    1. In the Third Report and Order, the Commission reallocated 30 
megahertz of spectrum in the 2 GHz MSS band for Fixed and Mobile 
services on a primary basis and preserved the remaining 40 megahertz of 
spectrum for Mobile-Satellite Service (MSS) at this time. The 
Commission reallocated 15 megahertz from the MSS uplink band, 
specifically the 1990-2000 MHz and 2020-2025 MHz band segments, and 15 
megahertz from the MSS downlink band, specifically the 2165-2180 MHz 
band segment. We modified the Table of Allocations to provide for Fixed 
and Mobile services in these bands on a co-primary basis. In addition, 
we also modified footnotes NG 156 and NG 168 of the U.S. Table of 
Frequency Allocations, concerning Fixed and Mobile service status in 
bands shared with MSS, to reflect the revised MSS bands. The Commission 
created two new non-Federal Government footnotes that make incumbent 
BAS and cable television relay service operations that are secondary to 
MSS also secondary to new Fixed and Mobile services after prescribed 
cut-off dates. Finally, we conclude that some abandoned 2 GHz spectrum 
recently recaptured as a result of the initial MSS milestone review 
will be reassigned to the authorized MSS operators that remain when we 
complete the initial milestone review.
    2. The 30 megahertz of spectrum that was reallocated from MSS comes 
from two sources: 14 megahertz of spectrum that was not assigned to any 
of the MSS licensees and 16 megahertz of spectrum (of the 21 megahertz) 
that had been abandoned at the time the Third R&O was adopted, as a 
result of MSS licensees not meeting initial milestones. The 
International Bureau has cancelled three MSS authorizations, thereby 
recapturing 21 megahertz of spectrum. Sixteen megahertz of this 
recaptured spectrum, as well as the 14 megahertz of unassigned 
spectrum, will be reallocated immediately for Fixed and Mobile 
services. Relying on unassigned and abandoned spectrum as the basis for 
the reallocation is least disruptive to the MSS licensees. Further, the 
initial MSS milestone review, which is not yet completed, has already 
made available an additional 5 megahertz of abandoned spectrum that we 
are not reallocating for new services. We note that the MSS entities 
have asserted the need for access to more than 3.5 megahertz of 
spectrum in each band for their Selected Assignments. We thus conclude 
that the public interest would be served by redistributing abandoned 2 
GHz spectrum recently recaptured as a result of the initial MSS 
milestone review, above the 16 megahertz being reallocated, to the 
authorized MSS operators that remain when we complete the initial 
milestone review. Thus, it is possible that more than 5 megahertz of 
abandoned spectrum may be available for redistribution when the initial 
MSS milestone review is completed. We further note that the MSS 
milestone review is an ongoing process that spans several years, and it 
is possible that not all currently authorized MSS networks will be 
deployed. As we previously stated in 2 GHz MSS R&O, 65 FR 59140, Oct. 
4, 2000, we have not established nor do we do so here any policy or 
rule regarding the use of additional abandoned spectrum that may result 
after future MSS milestone reviews are completed. Instead, we will 
evaluate whether to redistribute such spectrum or make it available to 
new entrants after achievement of each of our system implementation 
milestones.
    3. Because we are revising the allocated spectrum for MSS and 
modifying the amount of spectrum that will constitute a Selected 
Assignment, we have also modified how Selected Assignments are to be 
located in the revised MSS bandwidth. In the 2 GHz MSS R&O, we have 
determined that the MSS band plan would be divided into equal segments 
based on the number of licensed MSS systems. This incremental spacing 
approach allows MSS licensees to identify Selected Assignments working 
from either the bottom or the top of the band without requiring 
assignments to be selected in sequential order. In order to maintain 
this flexibility, the plan for each band will be based on dividing the 
revised MSS allocation in each band by the number of MSS licensees 
remaining when we complete the initial MSS milestone review. Thus, MSS 
licensees will choose Selected Assignments as an integer multiple of 
this amount from either band edge. We have modified, pursuant to 
section 316 of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. 316, and consistent 
with our decisions here, the 2 GHz MSS authorizations to increase the 
amount of spectrum for Selected Assignments, to require that a Selected 
Assignment be located within the revised MSS allocation, and to require 
that a Selected Assignment be chosen such that the band edge of the 
assignment is an integer multiple of the revised value from the band 
edge. We have also delegated authority to the International Bureau to 
issue revised authorizations, consistent with the decisions in this 
Third Report and Order, when the initial milestone review is completed. 
When the authorizations are modified, the MSS entities, can follow 
current procedures for notifying the Commission of their Selected 
Assignments and their selections will be put on public notice.
    4. In deciding which segments of the MSS spectrum should be 
reallocated for Fixed and Mobile services, we recognize that the record 
is split on whether we should reallocate spectrum that overlaps the 
global MSS allocation, which consists of paired 30 megahertz bands at 
1980-2110 MHz and 2170-2200 MHz. The U.S. MSS allocation, which 
consists of two paired 35 megahertz bands, overlaps 20 megahertz of the 
international allocation in the lower uplink band (1990-2010 MHz) and 
all of the 30 megahertz of the international allocation in the upper 
downlink band (2170-2200 MHz). After careful

[[Page 11988]]

consideration of the record, we conclude that, on balance, the benefits 
to the public of providing additional spectrum for Fixed and Mobile 
services that overlaps the international 2 GHz MSS band outweigh the 
impact on MSS. Our decision is to reallocate MSS spectrum in a way that 
will allow new entrants to take advantage of economies of scale in 
developing and deploying new services while maintaining sufficient 
international MSS spectrum.
    5. In the 1990-2025 MHz band, we have reallocated from the current 
MSS allocation a 10 megahertz block at 1990-2000 MHz, which is 
contiguous with the existing Broadband PCS allocation at 1930-1990 MHz, 
and a 5 megahertz block at 2020-2025 MHz. Because the 10 megahertz 
block is contiguous with the Broadband PCS band, this spectrum could 
provide needed growth spectrum for PCS providers, as well as facilitate 
new AWS equipment development and deployment. This reallocation will 
reduce by 10 megahertz the current 20 megahertz available for the 
international MSS uplink allocation. While we recognize that globally 
harmonized spectrum is an important resource, we share Cellular 
Telecommunications and Internet Association's concerns regarding 
potential interference to existing PCS operations at 1930-1990 MHz. We 
believe that in this instance, these interference concerns outweigh the 
benefits of increased global harmonized spectrum. We find that we can 
accommodate the international needs of 2 GHz MSS licensees in the 
remaining 10 megahertz (uplink) + 20 megahertz (downlink) of 
overlapping international spectrum. Not all of the eight authorized MSS 
networks will be deployed, not all of the proposed MSS networks will be 
providing global service, and most MSS licensees propose to operate 
throughout the currently allocated band (2000-2020 MHz). The remaining 
MSS entities will be able to adapt their frequency use within the U.S. 
to the remaining allocated spectrum (2000-2020 MHz), and use any 
spectrum within the international allocation (1980-2010 MHz) outside 
the U.S. Any newly authorized MSS networks could be built to 
accommodate the revised MSS allocation, assuming that sharing with 
incumbent MSS licensees is possible. We conclude that our decision to 
reduce the amount of globally harmonized MSS spectrum that will be 
available in the United States is appropriate at this time and 
consistent with the current spectrum requirements for the global 
portion of the 2 GHz MSS industry. Despite this action, we remain 
cognizant and supportive of the benefits of global spectrum 
harmonization, when appropriate.
    6. In the 2165-2200 MHz band, we balanced the MSS and terrestrial 
services needs by reallocating a 15 megahertz block at 2165-2180 MHz. 
This reallocation will minimize the impact on MSS, as all of the 
remaining 20 megahertz domestic allocation will overlap with the 
current international MSS downlink allocation--and, thus, 30 of the 40 
megahertz of remaining MSS spectrum will overlap with the global 
allocation. We believe that MSS licensees should not be significantly 
impaired in providing satellite services in this band. We note that, as 
a result of our previous decision in this docket, 45 megahertz of 
contiguous spectrum, from 2110-2155 MHz, will be available for AWS. We 
also have proposed to make the adjacent bands at 2155-2160 and 2160-
2165 MHz available for AWS. We note that our decision here to 
reallocate the adjacent MSS spectrum at 2165-2180 MHz is consistent 
with the majority of the AWS proponents who favor reallocating MSS 
spectrum adjacent to the 2110-2165 MHz band. Contiguous spectrum would 
make it easier to accommodate multiple licensees using larger spectrum 
blocks throughout this band. Further, a flexible allocation at 2110-
2165 MHz would overlap to a large extent the international allocation 
for a terrestrial component of advanced services at 2110-2170 MHz and 
thus will promote the timely introduction of new equipment and services 
in this spectrum.
    7. As a consequence of our decision to reallocate the 1990-2000/
2020-2025/2165-2180 MHz bands, we note that coordination of satellite 
and terrestrial use with Canada and Mexico will be necessary. Finally, 
we are not reaching decisions here on several other issues raised in 
the Further Notice, 66 FR 47618, September 13, 2001, such as the 
consolidation of MSS assignments and BAS and FS relocation issues. We 
will address those issues in further proceedings. We note, for example, 
that relocating incumbent BAS operations in the 1990-2025 MHz band will 
be further complicated by our decision here. As we stated in the 
Further Notice when discussing possible reallocation of spectrum in the 
1990-2025 MHz band, the relocation of BAS from any portion of the band 
would be shared between new MSS entrants and other new entrants in the 
band. Although we conclude that this principle would apply as a 
consequence of our reallocation decision, we will address fully BAS 
relocation issues in a future separate proceeding. We intend to address 
the relocation issues well in advance of the September 6, 2003, 
expiration of the initial two-year mandatory negotiation period for 
Phase 1 of the relocation plan between MSS and BAS.
    8. This Second Memorandum Opinion and Order addresses a petition 
for rule making filed by CTIA on May 18, 2001, requesting that the 2 
GHz MSS bands be reallocated for other uses (such as terrestrial 
wireless services) and also asking that the Commission withhold grant 
of 2 GHz MSS licenses. In the Further Notice, we granted the petition 
insofar as we proposed to reallocate 10-14 megahertz of spectrum for 
AWS, and denied it insofar as it requested reallocation of the entire 2 
GHz MSS band and delaying of the licensing of MSS systems in the band. 
We stated that our actions in the Further Notice would better serve the 
public with respect to these issues and was consistent with the 
International Bureau's granting of the MSS licenses on July 17, 2001. 
In its petition for reconsideration, CTIA claims we made an error by 
acting on its petition without first placing it on public notice, and 
asks that we vacate our decision to reject its petition for rulemaking, 
place the petition on public notice, and consider it ab initio. CTIA 
also claims that we failed to articulate a reasoned decision for 
rejecting its request and, further, that we could not reasonably rely 
on the grant of the MSS licenses because that action prejudged our 
consideration of CTIA's petition.
    9. Although we did not place CTIA's petition on public notice, our 
decision in that regard did not prejudice CTIA. We note that various 
parties filed responsive comments addressing reallocation of the entire 
2 MSS GHz band in IB Docket No. 99-81, which demonstrates that the 
public was provided the opportunity to submit comment on the 
reallocation question raised by CTIA's petition, and did so. Moreover, 
the Commission has already raised and duly considered this reallocation 
question. The same day the Commission adopted the Further Notice that 
considered the reallocation of some MSS spectrum, it initiated a 
separate proceeding to explore whether MSS licensees should be afforded 
additional flexibility. Together, these proceedings explored the larger 
issue of MSS use that is also reflected in CTIA's petition. The Third 
R&O we adopted concludes that a portion of the MSS spectrum should be 
reallocated to support AWS, but rejects a complete reallocation of the 
band. Accordingly, CTIA's original petition for rule making is now 
moot,

[[Page 11989]]

and we deny its petition for reconsideration.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    10. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) \1\ an 
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was incorporated in the 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Order (NPRM),\2\ as well as the 
Memorandum Opinion and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making 
(Further NPRM).\3\ The Commission sought written public comments on the 
proposals in the NPRM and Further NPRM, including comment on each IRFA. 
This present Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) conforms to 
the RFA.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA (codified at 5 U.S.C. 601-612) has 
been amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness 
Act of 1996 (SBREFA), Pub. L. 104-121, Title II, 110 Stat. 857 
(1996).
    \2\ Amendment of Part 2 of the Commission's Rules to Allocate 
Spectrum Below 3 GHz for Mobile and Fixed Services to Support the 
Introduction of New Advanced Wireless Services, Including Third 
Generation Wireless Systems, ET Docket No. 00-258, Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking and Order, 16 FCC Rcd 596 (2001), 66 FR 18740, 
April 11, 2001.
    \3\ Amendment of Part 2 of the Commission's Rules to Allocate 
Spectrum Below 3 GHz for Mobile and Fixed Services to Support the 
Introduction of New Advanced Wireless Services, including Third 
Generation Wireless Systems, ET Docket No. 00-258, ET Docket No. 95-
18, and IB Docket No. 99-81, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 66 FR 
47518, September 13, 2001, and Further Notice of Proposed Rule 
Making, 16 FCC Rcd 16043 (2001), 66 FR 47618, September 13, 2001.
    \4\ See 5 U.S.C. 604.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Need for, and Objectives of, the Third Report and Order

    11. The Third Report and Order (Third R&O) continues our efforts to 
allocate spectrum that can be used for the provision of advanced 
wireless services (AWS) to the public, which in turn supports our 
obligations under Section 706 of the 1996 Telecommunication Act \5\ 
and, more generally, serves the public interest by promoting rapid and 
efficient radio communication facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Section 706 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 
codified at 47 U.S.C. 157.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    12. The Third R&O discusses the need for spectrum allocations of 
sufficient size and with particular characteristics so as to allow for 
the provision of AWS. Specifically, it evaluates spectrum that was 
formerly allocated to the Mobile-Satellite Service (MSS). The 
Commission previously concluded that 2 GHz MSS licensees could operate 
using a smaller amount of spectrum than that which had previously been 
allocated. The Third R&O allocates spectrum for fixed and mobile 
services (which could be made available for AWS) in the 1990-2000 MHz, 
2020-2025 MHz, and 2165-2180 MHz bands.

Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response to 
the IRFA

    13. There were no comments filed that specifically addressed the 
rules and policies proposed in the IRFA.

Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the 
Rules Will Apply

    14. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of, and, 
where feasible, an estimate of, the number of small entities that may 
be affected by the rules adopted herein.\6\ The RFA generally defines 
the term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms 
``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental 
jurisdiction.'' \7\ In addition, the term ``small business'' has the 
same meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small 
Business Act.\8\ A ``small business concern'' is one which: (1) Is 
independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of 
operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the 
Small Business Administration (SBA).\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 5 U.S.C. 604(a)(3).
    \7\ 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
    \8\ 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (incorporating by reference the definition 
of ``small-business concern'' in the Small Business Act, 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 definition(s) in the Federal 
Register.''
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 632.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    15. A small organization is generally ``any not-for-profit 
enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not 
dominant in its field.'' \10\ Nationwide, as of 1992, there were 
approximately 275,801 small organizations.\11\ ``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.'' \12\ As of 1992, there were 
approximately 85,006 governmental entities in the United States.\13\ 
This number includes 38,978 counties, cities, and towns; of these, 
37,566, or 96%, have populations of fewer then 50,000.\14\ The Census 
Bureau estimates that this ratio is approximately accurate for all 
governmental entities. Thus, of the 85,006 governmental entities, we 
estimate that 81,600 (96%) are small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 5 U.S.C. 601(4).
    \11\ Department of Commerce, U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1992 
Economic Census, Table 6 (special tabulation of data under contract 
to Office of Advocacy of the U.S. Small Business Administration).
    \12\ 5 U.S.C. 601(5).
    \13\ U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, ``1992 Census 
of Governments.''
    \14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Radiotelephone Operators. The Commission has not developed service 
rules for AWS spectrum, nor has it attempted to categorize potential 
licensees for this spectrum. However, because many of the comments we 
received in support of our efforts to allocate spectrum for AWS were 
submitted by commercial radiotelephone operators and because licensees 
of AWS-like bands in other countries include incumbent commercial 
radiotelephone operators, we believe that there is a high likelihood 
that the class of AWS licensees may ultimately consist of one or more 
radiotelephone operator. Therefore, we examine this category in greater 
depth. The SBA has developed a small business size standard for small 
businesses in the category ``Cellular and Other Wireless 
Telecommunications.'' \15\ Under that SBA category, a business is small 
if it has 1,500 or fewer employees.\16\ According to the Bureau of the 
Census, only twelve firms from a total of 1238 cellular and other 
wireless telecommunications firms operating during 1997 had 1,000 or 
more employees.\17\ Therefore, even if all twelve of these firms were 
cellular telephone companies, nearly all cellular carriers were small 
businesses under the SBA's definition. In addition, we note that there 
are 1807 cellular licenses; however, a cellular licensee may own 
several licenses. According to the most recent Trends in Telephone 
Service data, 858 carriers reported that they were engaged in the 
provision of either cellular service, Personal Communications Service 
(PCS), or Specialized Mobile Radio telephony services, which are placed 
together in that data. We have estimated that 291 of these are small 
under the SBA small business size standard.\18\ Accordingly, based on 
this data, we estimate that not more than 291 radiotelephone operators

[[Page 11990]]

would be affected by a decision to make additional spectrum available 
for AWS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 13 CFR 121.201, North American Industry Classification 
System (NAICS) code 513322.
    \16\ Id.
    \17\ U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, 1997 
Economic Census, Information--Subject Series, Establishment and Firm 
Size, Table 5--Employment Size of Firms Subject to Federal Income 
Tax at 64, NAICS code 513322 (October 2000).
    \18\ See Trends in Telephone Service, Industry Analysis and 
Technology Division, Wireline Communications Bureau, Table 5.3, page 
5-5 (May 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Geostationary, Non-Geostationary Orbit, Fixed Satellite, or Mobile 
Satellite Service Operators (including 2 GHz MSS systems). The 
Commission has not developed a definition of small entities applicable 
to geostationary or non-geostationary orbit, fixed-satellite or mobile-
satellite service operators. The SBA has developed a small business 
size standard for Satellite Telecommunications Carriers, which consists 
of all such companies having $12.5 million or less in annual 
receipts.\19\ In addition, a second SBA size standard for Other 
Telecommunications includes ``facilities operationally connected with 
one or more terrestrial communications systems and capable of 
transmitting telecommunications to or receiving telecommunications from 
satellite systems,'' \20\ and also has a size standard of annual 
receipts of $12.5 million or less. According to Census Bureau data for 
1997, there were 324 firms in the category Satellite 
Telecommunications, total, that operated for the entire year.\21\ Of 
this total, 273 firms had annual receipts of $5 million to $9,999,999 
and an additional 24 firms had annual receipts of $10 million to 
$24,999,990.\22\ Thus, under this size standard, the majority of firms 
can be considered small. In addition, according to Census Bureau data 
for 1997, there were 439 firms in the category Satellite 
Telecommunications, total, that operated for the entire year.\23\ Of 
this total, 424 firms had annual receipts of $5 million to $9,999,999 
and an additional 6 firms had annual receipts of $10 million to 
$24,999,990.\24\ Thus, under this second size standard, the majority of 
firms can be considered small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 13 CFR 121.201, North American Industry Classification 
System (NAICS) code 517410 (formerly 513340).
    \20\ Id. NAICS code 517910 (formerly 513390).
    \21\ U.S. Census Bureau, 1997 Economic Census, Subject Series: 
Information, ``Receipt Size of Firms Subject to Federal Income Tax: 
1997,'' Table 4, NAICS code 517410 (issued Oct. 2000).
    \22\ Id.
    \23\ U.S. Census Bureau, 1997 Economic Census, Subject Series: 
Information, ``Receipt Size of Firms Subject to Federal Income Tax: 
1997,'' Table 4, NAICS code 517910 (issued Oct. 2000).
    \24\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance 
Requirements

    16. The Third R&O addresses the possible use of frequency bands 
below 3 GHz to support the introduction of new AWS, but does not 
propose service rules. Thus, the item contains no new reporting, 
recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements.

Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities, 
and Significant Alternatives Considered

    17. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant 
alternatives that it has considered in developing its 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 and reporting requirements under the rule for such 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 
such small entities.'' \25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 5 U.S.C. 603(c)(1)-(c)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    18. Providing spectrum to support the introduction of new advanced 
mobile and fixed terrestrial wireless services is critical to the 
continuation of technological advancement. First and foremost, the 
Commission believes that providing for expanded use of the frequency 
bands identified in the Third R&O in order to allow for a wide range of 
voice, data, and broadband services over a variety of mobile and fixed 
networks will provide substantial new opportunities for small entities, 
including (but not limited to) small entities that are radiotelephone 
operators.
    19. In prior decisions, we determined that MSS operations could 
exist within a 40 megahertz allocation, and this spectrum is not at 
issue in the current proceeding. Instead, the Third R&O addresses the 
use of 30 megahertz of abandoned MSS spectrum (i.e. spectrum available 
for reallocation because licensees either failed to satisfy Commission 
rules pertaining to system construction or because they voluntarily 
relinquished their authorizations). For this spectrum, we contrast the 
public benefits of the allocation of AWS and the potential that small 
entities will be involved in the provision of AWS with the likelihood 
that, at the time of MSS system implementation, no small businesses 
will be providing MSS. For this reason, we believe that the 
reallocation of spectrum from MSS in the Third R&O will actually 
provide small entities with opportunities that would have otherwise 
been unavailable.

Report to Congress

    20. The Commission will send a copy of the Third Report and Order 
including this FRFA, in a report to be sent to Congress pursuant to the 
Congressional Review Act.\26\ In addition, the Commission will send a 
copy of the Third Report and Order, including this FRFA, to the Chief 
Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA. A copy of the Third Report and Order 
and FRFA (or summaries thereof) will also be published in the Federal 
Register.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
    \27\ See 5 U.S.C. 604(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of Subjects

47 CFR Part 2

    Communications equipment.

47 CFR Part 25

    Communications equipment, Satellites.

    Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

Rule Changes

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission amends 47 CFR parts 2 and 25 to read 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. Section 2.106 is amended as follows:
    a. Revise pages 48 and 49 of the Table.
    b. In the list of non-Federal Government (NG) footnotes, revise 
footnotes NG156 and NG168 and add footnotes NG177 and NG178.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P

[[Page 11991]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TR13MR03.004


[[Page 11992]]


[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TR13MR03.005

BILLING CODE 6712-01-C

[[Page 11993]]

* * * * *

Non-Federal Government (NG) Footnotes

* * * * *
    NG156 The band 2000-2020 MHz is also allocated to the fixed and 
mobile services on a primary basis for facilities where the receipt 
date of the initial application was prior to June 27, 2000, and on a 
secondary basis for all other initial applications. Not later than 
September 6, 2010, the band 2000-2020 MHz is allocated to the fixed and 
mobile services on a secondary basis.
* * * * *
    NG168 The band 2180-2200 MHz is also allocated to the fixed and 
mobile services on a primary basis for facilities where the receipt 
date of the initial application was prior to January 16, 1992, and on a 
secondary basis for all other initial applications. Not later than 
September 6, 2010, the band 2180-2200 MHz is allocated to the fixed and 
mobile services on a secondary basis.
* * * * *
    NG177 In the bands 1990-2000 MHz and 2020-2025 MHz, where the 
initial filing date for facilities in the fixed and mobile services was 
prior to June 27, 2000, said facilities shall operate on a primary 
basis and all later-applied-for facilities shall operate on a secondary 
basis to Advanced Wireless Services. Not later than September 6, 2010, 
all such facilities in the bands 1990-2000 MHz and 2020-2025 MHz shall 
operate on a secondary basis to Advanced Wireless Services.
    NG178 In the band 2165-2180 MHz, where the initial filing date for 
facilities in the fixed and mobile services was prior to January 16, 
1992, said facilities shall operate on a primary basis and all later-
applied-for facilities shall operate on a secondary basis to Advanced 
Wireless Services. Not later than September 6, 2010, all such 
facilities in the band 2165-2180 MHz shall operate on a secondary basis 
to Advanced Wireless Services.
* * * * *

PART 25--SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS

    3. The authority citation for part 25 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 701-774. Interprets or applies sections 4, 
301, 302, 303, 307, 309 and 332 of the Communications Act, as 
amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154, 301, 302, 303, 307, 309 and 332, 
unless otherwise noted.


    4. Section 25.201 is amended by revising the definition for ``2 GHz 
Mobile-Satellite Service'' to read as follows:


Sec.  25.201  Definitions.

* * * * *
    2 GHz Mobile Satellite Service. A mobile-satellite service that 
operated in the 2000-2020 MHz and 2180-2200 MHz frequency bands, or in 
any portion thereof.
* * * * *

    5. Section 25.202 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(4)(ii) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  25.202  Frequencies, frequency tolerance and emission 
limitations.

    (a) * * *
    (4) * * *
    (ii) The following frequencies are available for use by the 2 GHz 
Mobile-Satellite Service: 2000-2020 MHz: User-to-Satellite Link; 2180-
2200 MHz: Satellite-to-User Link.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 03-6039 Filed 3-12-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P