[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 109 (Tuesday, June 7, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32901-32906]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-14001]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 27

[WT Docket No. 03-66; RM-11614; FCC 11-81]


The Provision of Fixed and Mobile Broadband Access, Educational 
and Other Advanced Services in the 2150-2162 and 2500-2690 MHz Bands

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission seeks comment on a proposal 
to use wider channel bandwidths for the provision of broadband services 
in certain spectrum bands. Specifically, we consider changes to the 
out-of-band emission limits for mobile Broadband Radio Service (BRS) 
and Educational Broadband Service (EBS) devices operating in the 2496-
2690 MHz band (2.5 GHz band). The proposed changes may permit operators 
to use spectrum more efficiently, and to provide higher data rates to 
consumers, thereby advancing key goals of the National Broadband Plan. 
Also, the changes would promote greater harmonization of FCC 
requirements with global standards for mobile devices in the 2.5 GHz 
band, potentially making equipment more affordable and furthering the 
development of mobile broadband devices. In addition, we seek comment 
on whether the proposed changes can be made without increasing the 
potential for harmful interference to existing users in the 2.5 GHz 
band and adjacent bands.

DATES: Submit comments on or before July 7, 2011. Submit reply comments 
on or before July 22, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20554. You may submit comments, identified by WT Docket 
No. 03-66, by any of the following methods:
    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 
instructions for submitting comments.
    Federal Communications Commission's Web Site: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    People with Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request reasonable 
accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language 
interpreters, CART, etc.) by e-mail: [email protected] or phone: (202) 
418-0530 or TTY: (202) 418-0432.
    For detailed instructions for submitting comments and additional 
information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Schauble, Deputy Chief, Broadband 
Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Federal Communications 
Commission, 445 12th Street, SW, Washington, DC 20554, at (202) 418-
0797 or via the Internet to [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Fourth

[[Page 32902]]

Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 11-81, adopted on May 24, 
2011, and released on May 27, 2011. The full text of this document is 
available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in 
the FCC Reference Information Center, Room CY-A257, 445 12th Street, 
SW., Washington, DC 20554. The complete text may be purchased from the 
Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc. 
(BCPI), Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 
20554, (202) 488-5300, facsimile (202) 488-5563, or via e-mail at 
[email protected]. The complete text is also available on the 
Commission's Web site at http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-81A1.doc. Alternative formats (computer diskette, 
large print, audio cassette, and Braille) are available by contacting 
Brian Millin at (202) 418-7426, TTY (202) 418-7365, or via e-mail to 
[email protected].

SUMMARY:

I. Background

    1. General: On July 29, 2004, the Commission released the BRS/EBS 
R&O & FNPRM, which fundamentally transformed the rules for the 2.5 GHz 
band. In the BRS/EBS R&O, the Commission adopted a band plan that 
restructured the 2.5 GHz band into upper and lower-band segments for 
low-power operations (UBS and LBS, respectively), and a mid-band 
segment (MBS) for high-power operations, in order to reduce the 
likelihood of interference caused by incompatible uses. The Commission 
also revised the out-of band emission limits for BRS and EBS licensees 
consistent with a proposal made by a coalition of organizations 
representing BRS and EBS licensees. With respect to mobile devices, the 
Commission adopted an emission mask which requires that emissions 
outside the licensee's frequency bands of operation be attenuated below 
the transmitter power (P) by a factor of 43 + 10 log(P) decibels (dB) 
at the channel's edge, and 55 + 10 log(P) dB at 5.5 megahertz from the 
channel edge, where (P) is the transmitter power measured in watts. 5.5 
megahertz represents the size of individual channels in the LBS and UBS 
in the post-transition band plan adopted by the Commission.
    2. Today, the 2.5 GHz band is used by Clearwire Corporation 
(Clearwire) and other operators to provide wireless broadband service 
using the Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access (WiMAX) 
version 802.16e standard. WiMAX is a wireless broadband access 
technology based on the Institute of Electrical and Electronics 
Engineers (IEEE) 802.16 standard which supports delivery of non-line-
of-sight connectivity between a subscriber station and base station 
with a typical cell radius of 3 to 10 kilometers. WiMAX can support 
fixed and nomadic, as well as portable and mobile, wireless broadband 
applications. Another standard for wireless broadband technology is 
Long Term Evolution (LTE), which is developed by the Third Generation 
Partnership Project (3GPP), a consensus-driven international 
partnership of telecommunications standards bodies. Both IEEE and 3GPP 
are working to develop standards for refinements of WiMAX and LTE, 
which are known as WiMAX 2 (based on the 802.16m standard and LTE-
Advanced (3GPP Release 10 and beyond).
    3. Current WiMAX deployments typically use maximum channel 
bandwidths of 10 megahertz. Clearwire reports that average usage for 
its mobile services is more than 7 GB/month. Wireless broadband data 
usage is projected to increase by a factor of at least twenty from 2009 
to 2014. One way of making more efficient use of spectrum is to 
increase channel bandwidth. LTE-Advanced and WiMAX2 contemplate channel 
bandwidths up to 40-100 megahertz.
    4. WCAI Petition: On October 22, 2010, the Wireless Communications 
Association International (WCAI) filed a petition for rulemaking asking 
the Commission to revise the out-of-band emission limits for mobile 
digital stations operating in the BRS and EBS band to accommodate 
channel bandwidths of 20 megahertz and wider. WCAI asserts that it is 
currently difficult for BRS/EBS devices to meet the out-of-band 
emission limits for 10 megahertz channels because of the limits of 
power amplifier efficiency inherent in current technology, and states 
that developing a smartphone that would fully use a 20 megahertz 
channel bandwidth that complies with the current out-of-band emission 
limits would be very difficult or impossible.
    5. WCAI argues that the revised rules will not significantly 
increase the risk of interference, because mobile 4G devices using 
orthogonal frequency-division multiple access (OFDMA) technology (on 
which WiMAX and LTE are based) are not typically allocated all of the 
uplink bandwidth while operating at full transmit power, the scenario 
that would maximize potential interference. In addition, WCAI notes 
that mobile 4G devices operate under very stringent power controls in 
order to maximize battery life and minimize intra-system interference 
and argues that these changes are necessary to permit operators to 
realize the full benefits of 4G technologies.
    6. A number of parties support the proposed rule changes, including 
Clearwire, the largest BRS licensee and lessee of EBS spectrum and 
DigitalBridge Communications Corp., a mobile WiMAX provider; as well as 
equipment and component manufacturers including GCT Semiconductor, HTC 
America, Inc., Motorola, Inc., and Nokia Siemens Networks US LLC/Nokia 
Inc. These parties assert that the proposed changes would allow 
wireless carriers to realize the full benefits of 4G technologies, 
offer a greater variety of services and applications, allow more 
efficient use of spectrum, and better align the Commission's rules with 
the approach of 3GPP and other standards bodies.
    7. One concern raised in the oppositions is that the rule change 
will result in increased interference to service providers in adjacent 
spectrum bands. Globalstar, Inc. (Globalstar), which is authorized to 
operate a mobile satellite service (MSS) system with the downlink 
(satellite to mobile earth stations) in the 2483.5-2500 MHz band, 
asserts that the proposed change could cause significant harm to its 
MSS users, including consumers and public safety users. Similarly, 
Engineers for the Integrity of Broadcast Auxiliary Services Spectrum 
(EIBASS) are concerned that the proposed change could result in greater 
interference to Broadcast Auxiliary Services (BAS) operations operating 
on Channels A10 (2483.5-2500 MHz) and A9 (2467-2483.5 MHz). With 
respect to the concerns raised by Globalstar and EIBASS, WCAI responds 
that those parties exaggerate the risk of interference, because the 
chances that BRS Channel 1 would be operating at full power across the 
entire bandwidth of the channel in the vicinity of Globalstar's mobile 
receivers and BAS Channels A9 or A10 receivers are very low.
    8. IP Wireless, Inc. (IP Wireless), a developer and manufacturer of 
3GPP user equipment, opposes the rule changes proposed by WCAI because 
it does not believe changes are necessary to permit wider bandwidth 
operations. IP Wireless asserts that it makes available LTE devices 
that can ``easily'' meet the FCC's existing out-of-band emission limits 
for mobile devices operating with 20 megahertz channels. WCAI responds 
that IP Wireless is just one equipment supplier in a larger ecosystem 
and that other equipment manufacturers agree ``that the mask proposed 
in the Petition represents an

[[Page 32903]]

appropriate and reasonable trade-off between form factor, battery 
consumption, and performance, especially for the most challenging type 
of device: highly integrated smartphones with multiple radios.''

II. Discussion

    9. We find that facilitating the use of wider channels in the 2.5 
GHz spectrum band would greatly enhance spectrum efficiency and 
throughput in wireless broadband systems operating in the band. We also 
find that the opportunity to harmonize the Commission's rules with 
international standards could benefit both operators and consumers by 
encouraging the development of mobile broadband equipment for the 2.5 
GHz band at lower cost. For these reasons, we initiate this rulemaking 
on WCAI's proposal to change the out-of-band emission limits for mobile 
devices for BRS and EBS.
    10. Specifically, we seek comment on whether to modify the out-of-
band emission limits for BRS and EBS mobile digital stations by 
modifying the factors by which these devices' emissions outside the 
licensee's frequency bands of operation must be attenuated below the 
transmitter power (P), in Watts, to the following, as requested by 
WCAI:
     40 + 10 log (P) dB at the channel edge, measured using a 
resolution bandwidth of 2 percent of the emission bandwidth of the 
fundamental emission in the 1 megahertz bands immediately outside and 
adjacent to the frequency block.
     43 + 10 log (P) dB beyond 5 megahertz from the channel 
edges, and
     55 + 10 log (P) dB attenuation factor at a distance of 
``X'' megahertz from the channel edges, where ``X'' is the greater of 6 
megahertz or the actual emission bandwidth as defined in Sec.  
27.53(m)(6) of the Commission's rules.

WCAI asserts that these changes would allow operators to provide the 
full uplink capacity available in 20 megahertz or wider channels, and 
would harmonize the Commission's out-of-band emission limits with 3GPP 
standards for out-of-band emission limits in the 2.5 GHz band.
    11. WCAI has argued that it will be particularly difficult to 
design smartphone devices with small form factors that can use 20 
megahertz channels and meet the current OOBE requirements, and asserts 
that IP Wireless does not offer any handset devices. Does the existence 
of some mobile devices capable of operating on 20 megahertz channels 
and meeting the current FCC OOBE rules affect the necessity or 
desirability of making the proposed rule changes?
    12. We seek comment on whether the proposed rule change is 
necessary to permit mobile devices to operate in the 2.5 GHz band using 
channel bandwidths wider than 10 megahertz. IP Wireless claims to have 
equipment capable of operating on 20 megahertz channels that meets the 
FCC's current out-of-band emission limits, but a number of other 
equipment manufacturers and operators support the proposed rule change. 
Also, IP Wireless also argues that the proposed rule changes will 
result in insufficient protection against interference within the 2.5 
GHz band. Specifically, it claims that the more permissive 3GPP 
emissions standard on which the proposed rule changes are modeled has 
traditionally been applied to paired (Frequency Division Duplex (FDD)) 
spectrum allocations, and cites a European Conference of Postal and 
Telecommunications Administrations (CEPT) report for support that 
coexistence between FDD and Time Division Duplex (TDD) systems in 
adjacent spectrum, or between uncoordinated TDD systems, is generally 
achieved by a combination of the 3GPP emissions standards and guard 
bands. However, the CEPT report notes that the block edge mask limits 
it proposed were developed in order to manage the risk of harmful 
interference independently of any relaxation which may be achieved 
through mitigation techniques or coordination. We seek comment on how 
adoption of the proposed rule changes would affect the likelihood of 
interference within the 2.5 GHz band and whether additional protections 
against such interference would be needed. In that regard, we note that 
our existing rules contain a provision requiring both licensees to 
comply with a tighter emission mask for its base stations within 60 
days of receiving a documented interference complaint from an adjacent 
channel licensee. Since mobile devices and base stations operate in the 
same frequency band in TDD systems, and base stations operate with 
higher power, it appears that the existing provisions in our rules may 
protect adjacent channel licensees with protection against adjacent 
channel interference. We seek further comment on this issue.
    13. Globalstar and EIBASS contend that adopting WCAI's requested 
OOBE limits would increase the potential for harmful interference into 
the MSS and BAS bands and we seek comment. The Commission has 
previously said that the BRS/EBS out-of-band emission limits ``should 
allow MSS providers to operate without unnecessary restrictions or 
significant interference in the 2483.5-2495 MHz band.'' The same 
considerations apply to adjacent band BAS operations. As noted above, 
Globalstar, EIBASS and WCAI disagree about whether the proposed rule 
changes could result in increased interference into services below 2495 
MHz, the likelihood that such interference could result, and the harms 
that could result from such interference. In view of these disputes in 
the record, we seek comment including detailed engineering analyses on 
the potential for, and likelihood that, the proposed rule changes will 
result in harmful interference into MSS and BAS operations below 2495 
MHz. In this vein, we seek comment on the assumptions used by 
Globalstar in its engineering study, including its definition of 
interference as a signal level above -133 dBm/MHz. We also seek 
additional engineering analyses related to the potential for 
interference, in which the key assumptions underlying the analysis are 
identified, and accompanied by an explanation of why these assumptions 
are appropriate. We also seek comment on the significance of the fact 
that MSS licensees can file documented interference complaints against 
adjacent channel licensees and take advantage of the provisions that 
could require adjacent channel BRS licensees to comply with tighter 
base station emission masks.
    14. In addition, we seek comment on whether, in connection with the 
proposed rule changes, we should consider adopting additional measures 
of protecting against interference to adjacent bands. For example, we 
seek comment on the desirability and feasibility of establishing a 
fixed limit on out-of-band emissions below 2495 MHz or above 2690 MHz 
in order to protect adjacent bands' operations. While the WCAI Petition 
and comments discuss the use of 20 megahertz channels, the proposed 
rule is not limited to 20 megahertz channels, and developing standards 
contemplate the use of wider channels. We seek comment on whether the 
proposed rule would work for channels wider than 20 megahertz without 
causing interference to adjacent bands' operations, or whether we 
should set a maximum channel size to which the proposed out-of-band 
emission limits would apply. In addition, while the proposed rule 
change relies on standards being developed by 3GPP, we seek comment on 
whether, to the extent such information is available, the proposed 
changes would be consistent with IEEE's continuing development of

[[Page 32904]]

WiMAX2, as well as other evolving standards. Finally, we seek comment 
on whether any additional changes to the OOBE limits applicable to 
mobile devices in the 2.5 GHz band are necessary or desirable to 
promote greater efficiency and flexibility in the provision of 
broadband services in these bands?

Procedural Matters

Ex Parte Rules--Permit-But-Disclose Proceeding
    15. 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.
Comment Period and Procedures
    16. Pursuant to Sec. Sec.  1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's 
rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments and 
reply comments on or before the dates indicated on the first page of 
this document. Comments may be filed using: (1) The Commission's 
Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS), (2) the Federal Government's 
eRulemaking Portal, or (3) by filing paper copies. See Electronic 
Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (1998).
     Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically 
using the Internet by accessing the ECFS: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/ 
or the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Filers 
should follow the instructions provided on the Web site for submitting 
comments.
     For ECFS filers, if multiple docket or rulemaking numbers 
appear in the caption of this proceeding, filers must transmit one 
electronic copy of the comments for each docket or rulemaking number 
referenced in the caption. In completing the transmittal screen, filers 
should include their full name, U.S. Postal Service mailing address, 
and the applicable docket or rulemaking number. Comments shall be sent 
as an electronic file via the Internet to http://www.fcc.gov/e-file/ecfs.html. In completing the transmittal screen, commenters should 
include their full name, Postal Service mailing address, and the 
applicable docket number. Parties may also submit an electronic comment 
by Internet e-mail. To get filing instructions for e-mail comments, 
commenters should send an e-mail to [email protected], and include the 
following words in the body of the message, ``get form.'' A sample form 
and directions will be sent in response.
     Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must 
file an original and four copies of each filing. If more than one 
docket or rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding, 
filers must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or 
rulemaking number. Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, 
by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. 
Postal Service mail (although we continue to experience delays in 
receiving U.S. Postal Service mail). All filings must be addressed to 
the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal 
Communications Commission. The Commission's contractor will receive 
hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings for the 
Commission's Secretary at 236 Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110, 
Washington, DC 20002. The filing hours at this location are 8 a.m. to 7 
p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or 
fasteners. Any envelopes must be disposed of before entering the 
building. Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service 
Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton 
Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743. U.S. Postal Service first-class, 
Express, and Priority mail must be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., 
Washington DC 20554.
     People with Disabilities: To request materials in 
accessible formats for people with disabilities (braille, large print, 
electronic files, audio format), send an e-mail to [email protected] or 
call the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 
(voice), 202-418-0432 (tty).
     Availability of Documents: 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: Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, 
SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, 1-800-378-3160.

Paperwork Reduction Analysis

    17. This document does not contain proposed information 
collection(s) subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), 
Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any new 
or modified ``information collection burden for small business concerns 
with fewer than 25 employees,'' pursuant to the Small Business 
Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 
3506(c)(4) requirements.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    18. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as 
amended (RFA), the Commission has prepared this present Initial 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities by the 
policies and rules proposed in this Fourth Further Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking (4th FNPRM). Written public comments are requested on this 
IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be 
filed by the deadlines specified in the 4th NPRM for comments. The 
Commission will send a copy of this 4th FNPRM, including this IRFA, to 
the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration 
(SBA). In addition, the 4th FNPRM and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will 
be published in the Federal Register.
A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules
    In this 4th FNPRM, we seek comment on changing the out-of-band 
emission limits, which limit the amount of energy that can be radiated 
outside a licensee's authorized bandwidth, for mobile devices operating 
in the Broadband Radio Service (BRS) and Educational Broadband Service 
(EBS) in the 2496-2690 MHz band (2.5 GHz band). The proposed change is 
designed to facilitate the use of wider channel bandwidths, which could 
potentially allow higher data rates and more efficient use of spectrum. 
Such a change would increase the range of applications and devices that 
can benefit from mobile broadband connectivity, generating a 
corresponding increase in demand for mobile broadband service from 
consumers, businesses, public safety, health care, education, energy 
and other public safety uses. The proposed change is also designed to 
facilitate harmonization of future standards in the equipment market 
for mobile devices in the 2.5 GHz band, which would make equipment more 
affordable and further the development of advanced wireless broadband 
devices. We seek comment on whether the proposed changes can be made 
without any increase in the potential for harmful interference to 
existing users in the 2.5 GHz band and adjacent bands. We also consider 
establishing an additional requirement of fixed interference limits 
below 2496 MHz and above 2690 MHz in order to protect adjacent band 
users.

[[Page 32905]]

B. Legal Basis
    The proposed action is authorized pursuant to sections 1, 2, 4(i), 
7, 10, 201, 214, 301, 302, 303, 307, 308, 309, 310, 319, 324, 332, and 
333 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 
154(i), 157, 160, 201, 214, 301, 302, 303, 307, 308, 309, 310, 319, 
324, 332, and 333.
C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which 
the Proposed Rules Will Apply
    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 proposed rules and policies, if adopted. The RFA 
generally defines the term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning 
as the terms ``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small 
governmental jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' 
has the same meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the 
Small Business Act. 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 
SBA.
    Broadband Radio Service and Educational Broadband Service. 
Broadband Radio Service systems, previously referred to as Multipoint 
Distribution Service (MDS) and Multichannel Multipoint Distribution 
Service (MMDS) systems, and ``wireless cable,'' transmit video 
programming to subscribers and provide two-way high speed data 
operations using the microwave frequencies of the Broadband Radio 
Service (BRS) and Educational Broadband Service (EBS) (previously 
referred to as the Instructional Television Fixed Service (ITFS)). In 
connection with the 1996 BRS auction, the Commission established a 
small business size standard as an entity that had annual average gross 
revenues of no more than $40 million in the previous three calendar 
years. The BRS auctions resulted in 67 successful bidders obtaining 
licensing opportunities for 493 Basic Trading Areas (BTAs). Of the 67 
auction winners, 61 met the definition of a small business. BRS also 
includes licensees of stations authorized prior to the auction. At this 
time, we estimate that of the 61 small business BRS auction winners, 48 
remain small business licensees. In addition to the 48 small businesses 
that hold BTA authorizations, there are approximately 392 incumbent BRS 
licensees that are considered small entities. After adding the number 
of small business auction licensees to the number of incumbent 
licensees not already counted, we find that there are currently 
approximately 440 BRS licensees that are defined as small businesses 
under either the SBA or the Commission's rules. In 2009, the Commission 
conducted Auction 86, the sale of 78 licenses in the BRS areas. The 
Commission offered three levels of bidding credits: (i) A bidder with 
attributed average annual gross revenues that exceed $15 million and do 
not exceed $40 million for the preceding three years (small business) 
will receive a 15 percent discount on its winning bid; (ii) a bidder 
with attributed average annual gross revenues that exceed $3 million 
and do not exceed $15 million for the preceding three years (very small 
business) will receive a 25 percent discount on its winning bid; and 
(iii) a bidder with attributed average annual gross revenues that do 
not exceed $3 million for the preceding three years (entrepreneur) will 
receive a 35 percent discount on its winning bid. Auction 86 concluded 
in 2009 with the sale of 61 licenses. Of the ten winning bidders, two 
bidders that claimed small business status won 4 licenses; one bidder 
that claimed very small business status won three licenses; and two 
bidders that claimed entrepreneur status won six licenses.
    In addition, the SBA's Cable Television Distribution Services small 
business size standard is applicable to EBS. There are presently 2,032 
EBS licensees. All but 100 of these licenses are held by educational 
institutions. Educational institutions are included in this analysis as 
small entities. Thus, we estimate that at least 1,932 licensees are 
small businesses. Since 2007, Cable Television Distribution Services 
have been defined within the broad economic census category of Wired 
Telecommunications Carriers; that category is defined as follows: 
``This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in operating 
and/or providing access to transmission facilities and infrastructure 
that they own and/or lease for the transmission of voice, data, text, 
sound, and video using wired telecommunications networks. Transmission 
facilities may be based on a single technology or a combination of 
technologies.'' The SBA has developed a small business size standard 
for this category, which is: all such firms having 1,500 or fewer 
employees. To gauge small business prevalence for these cable services 
we must, however, use the most current census data that are based on 
the previous category of Cable and Other Program Distribution and its 
associated size standard; that size standard was: all such firms having 
$13.5 million or less in annual receipts. According to Census Bureau 
data for 2002, there were a total of 1,191 firms in this previous 
category that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 1,087 firms 
had annual receipts of under $10 million, and 43 firms had receipts of 
$10 million or more but less than $25 million. Thus, the majority of 
these firms can be considered small.
D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other 
Compliance Requirements
    This 4th FNPRM imposes no new reporting or recordkeeping 
requirements.
E. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small 
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered
    The only potential burden on small entities that hold BRS or EBS 
licenses is a potential increase in interference to existing users in 
the 2.5 GHz band. We believe this potential burden would be outweighed 
by benefits to small businesses that hold BRS and EBS licensees, who 
would be able to use wider channel bandwidths to provide faster service 
and use their spectrum more efficiently. An alternative being 
considered in order to minimize any potential burden is establishing 
fixed interference limits below 2496 MHz and above 2690 MHz in order to 
protect adjacent band users.
    The other main alternative would be to maintain the existing rules. 
If we maintained the existing rules, it would be more difficult or 
impossible for BRS and EBS operators to offer broadband systems with 
higher data rates by using wider channel bandwidths. Such difficulty 
would make it more difficult for BRS and EBS operators, including small 
entities, to be competitive with other broadband providers.

Ordering Clauses

    19. Accordingly, it is ordered that notice is hereby given of the 
proposed regulatory changes described in this Fourth Further Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking, and that comment is sought on these proposals.
    20. It is further ordered pursuant to section 4(i) of the 
Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), that the Commission's 
Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, 
shall send a copy of this Fourth Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 
including the Final Regulatory Certification and the Initial Regulatory 
Certification, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration.

[[Page 32906]]

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 27

    Communications common carriers, Radio.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR part 27 as follows:

PART 27--MISCELLANEOUS WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES

    1. The authority citation for part 27 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  47 U.S.C. 154, 301, 302, 303, 307, 309, 332, 336, 
and 337 unless otherwise noted.

    2. Section 27.53 is amended by revising paragraphs (m)(4) and 
(m)(6) to read as follows:


Sec.  27.53  Emission Limits.

* * * * *
    (m) * * *
    (4) For mobile digital stations, the attenuation factor shall be 
not less than 40 + 10 log (P) dB at the channel edge, 43 + 10 log (P) 
dB beyond 5 MHz from the channel edges, and 55 + 10 log (P) dB at X MHz 
from the channel edges, where X is the greater of 6 MHz or the actual 
emission bandwidth as defined in Sec.  27.53(m)(6). Mobile Satellite 
Service licensees operating on frequencies below 2495 MHz may also 
submit a documented interference complaint against BRS licensees 
operating on channel BRS Channel 1 on the same terms and conditions as 
adjacent channel BRS or EBS licensees.
* * * * *
    (6) Measurement procedure. Compliance with these rules is based on 
the use of measurement instrumentation employing a resolution bandwidth 
of 1 MHz or greater. However, in the 1 megahertz bands immediately 
outside and adjacent to the frequency block a resolution bandwidth of 
at least one percent (or two percent for mobile digital stations) of 
the emission bandwidth of the fundamental emission of the transmitter 
may be employed. A narrower resolution bandwidth is permitted in all 
cases to improve measurement accuracy provided the measured power is 
integrated over the full required measurement bandwidth (i.e., 1 
megahertz). The emission bandwidth is defined as the width of the 
signal between two points, one below the carrier center frequency and 
one above the carrier center frequency, outside of which all emissions 
are attenuated at least 26 dB below the transmitter power. With respect 
to television operations, measurements must be made of the separate 
visual and aural operating powers at sufficiently frequent intervals to 
ensure compliance with the rules.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2011-14001 Filed 6-6-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P