[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 219 (Monday, November 14, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 79894-79945]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-25765]



[[Page 79893]]

Vol. 81

Monday,

No. 219

November 14, 2016

Part III





Federal Communications Commission





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





47 CFR Parts 1, 2, 15, et al.





Use of Spectrum Bands Above 24 GHz for Mobile Radio Services; Final 
Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 81 , No. 219 / Monday, November 14, 2016 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 79894]]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 1, 2, 15, 25, 30, and 101

[GN Docket No. 14-177, IB Docket Nos. 15-256 and 97-95, RM-11664, WT 
Docket No. 10-112; FCC 16-89]


Use of Spectrum Bands Above 24 GHz for Mobile Radio Services

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission 
(Commission or FCC) adopts rules for specific millimeter wave (mmW) 
bands above 24 GHz. This action is undertaken to establish a regulatory 
framework for the use of these bands for the development of the next 
generational evolution of wireless technology. Once effective, these 
rules will promote the development of highly beneficial technologies, 
in particular the so-called 5G technology.

DATES: Effective December 14, 2016, except for Sec. Sec.  25.136 and 
30.8 which contain information collection requirements that are not 
effective until approved by the Office of Management and Budget. The 
FCC will publish a document in the Federal Register announcing the 
effective date for those sections.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Schauble of the Wireless 
Telecommunications Bureau, Broadband Division, at 202-418-0797 or 
[email protected], Michael Ha of the Office of Engineering and 
Technology, Policy and Rules Division, at 202-418-2099 or 
[email protected], or Jose Albuquerque of the International Bureau, 
Satellite Division, at 202-418-2288 or [email protected]. For 
information regarding the PRA information collection requirements 
contained in this PRA, contact Cathy Williams, Office of Managing 
Director, at (202) 418-2918, or via email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report 
and Order GN Docket No. 14-177, FCC 16-89, adopted and released on July 
14, 2016. The complete text of this document is available for public 
inspection and copying from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) 
Monday through Thursday or from 8 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. ET on Fridays in 
the FCC Reference Information Center, 445 12th Street SW., Room CY-
A257, Washington, DC 20554. The complete text is available on the 
Commission's Web site at http://wireless.fcc.gov, or by using the 
search function on the ECFS Web page at http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. 
Alternative formats are available to persons with disabilities by 
sending an email to [email protected] or by calling the Consumer & 
Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-418-0432 
(tty).

Ex Parte Presentations

    This proceeding shall continue to be treated as a ``permit-but-
disclose'' proceeding in accordance with the Commission's ex parte 
rules. Persons making ex parte presentations must file a copy of any 
written presentation or a memorandum summarizing any oral presentation 
within two business days after the presentation (unless a different 
deadline applicable to the Sunshine period applies). Persons making 
oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda summarizing the 
presentation must (1) list all persons attending or otherwise 
participating in the meeting at which the ex parte presentation was 
made, and (2) summarize all data presented and arguments made during 
the presentation. If the presentation consisted in whole or in part of 
the presentation of data or arguments already reflected in the 
presenter's written comments, memoranda or other filings in the 
proceeding, the presenter may provide citations to such data or 
arguments in his or her prior comments, memoranda, or other filings 
(specifying the relevant page and/or paragraph numbers where such data 
or arguments can be found) in lieu of summarizing them in the 
memorandum. Documents shown or given to Commission staff during ex 
parte meetings are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and must 
be filed consistent with Sec.  1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by 
Sec.  1.49(f) or for which the Commission has made available a method 
of electronic filing, written ex parte presentations and memoranda 
summarizing oral ex parte presentations, and all attachments thereto, 
must be filed through the electronic comment filing system available 
for that proceeding, and must be filed in their native format (e.g., 
.doc, .xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf). Participants in this proceeding 
should familiarize themselves with the Commission's ex parte rules.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Report and Order contains new information collection 
requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), 
Public Law 104-13. It will be submitted to the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) for review under Sec.  3507(d) of the PRA. OMB, the 
general public, and other Federal agencies will be invited to comment 
on the new information collection requirements contained in this 
proceeding.

Comment Filing Procedures

    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 the Commission's Electronic 
Comment Filing System (ECFS). 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://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/ or the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Filers should follow the instructions provided on the Web site for 
submitting comments and transmit one electronic copy of the filing to 
GN Docket No. 14-177. For ECFS filers, in completing the transmittal 
screen, filers should include their full name, U.S. Postal Service 
mailing address, and the applicable docket number.
     Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must 
file an original and one copy 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. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's 
Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
     All hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings 
for the Commission's Secretary must be delivered to FCC Headquarters at 
445 12th St. SW., Room TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours 
are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together 
with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes and boxes 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

[[Page 79895]]

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 email to [email protected] or call the 
Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-
418-0432 (tty).

Congressional Review Act

    The Commission will send a copy of this Report and Order in a 
report to be sent to Congress and the Government Accountability Office 
pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (CRA), see 5 U.S.C. 
801(a)(1)(A).

Synopsis

I. Introduction

    1. In this Report and Order, the Commission adopts new licensing, 
service, and technical rules for three bands. In so doing, the 
Commission attempts to follow a consistent framework across all of the 
bands that can serve as a template for additional bands in the future. 
The Commission adopted 10 year license terms and performance 
requirements that are flexible to allow multiple use cases to evolve 
over time. These basic building blocks are modified in order to meet 
the specific characteristics of a particular band.
    2. The Commission also took significant steps forward on solutions 
to spectrum sharing in the millimeter wave (mmW) bands. The Commission 
adopted rules that will allow both satellite and terrestrial networks 
to continue to expand in a flexible manner. The Commission continues to 
facilitate co-primary shared access to the 39.5-40 GHz band for Federal 
and non-Federal users, and building off of recent policy developments 
in spectrum sharing, it also created a new approach to Federal sharing 
in the 37 GHz band. Specifically, instead of relying on static 
exclusion zones, the Commission created a space for both Federal and 
non-Federal users to share on a coequal basis and set out a process for 
defining how that sharing will be implemented. Finally, the Commission 
substantially increases the amount of unlicensed spectrum available by 
adding another seven gigahertz to the existing 57-64 GHz band, and 
adopting flexible technical rules.

A. 28 GHz Band

1. Suitability for Mobile Use
    3. Some satellite operators, satellite equipment suppliers and 
satellite-focused trade associations urge the Commission not to 
authorize terrestrial mobile services in the 28 GHz band. This 
perspective is by no means unanimous or unqualified even among that 
group, however. SES, for example, says that it expects to support 
terrestrial mobile services in bands above 24 GHz by providing video 
distribution, providing backhaul services, and by extending terrestrial 
network coverage to sea, air, and remote land masses. EchoStar says 
that satellite operators could coexist with mobile services in the band 
by avoiding deployment of gateway earth stations in large urban 
centers. ViaSat estimates that the compatibility distance between 
satellite earth stations and terrestrial mobile in the 28 GHz band 
would be in the range of 160 meters, and could be further reduced by 
additional mitigation techniques. Nearly all other commenters who 
address the topic emphatically support mobile service authorization in 
the 28 GHz band.
    4. Perhaps more so than other mmW bands, the 28 GHz band has been 
the focus of academic research and industry prototyping efforts to 
develop mobile service technologies. The 28 GHz band is attractive for 
research on enabling mobility in mmW bands because, with 850 megahertz 
of contiguous bandwidth, it has ample capacity to accommodate a wide 
range of high data-rate applications, and it has global co-primary 
allocations for fixed and mobile services. There are no Federal 
allocations in the band. Further, because this is an active service 
with Local Multipoint Distribution Service (LMDS) licenses covering 
about 75 percent of the U.S. population, it can be quickly repurposed 
for new flexible uses, including mobile. The ready availability of the 
spectrum will also help drive the development of a robust ecosystem at 
a large scale.
    5. Opponents of authorizing new flexible and mobile use in the 28 
GHz band raise three basic objections: (1) That there is no 
international consensus to authorize mobile services in the band; (2) 
that LMDS operators do not have an equitable expectation of mobile 
rights in the band; and (3) that mobile services in the 28 GHz band 
would impair vital satellite services. The Commission discusses the 
first of those issues below, reserving discussion of the second and 
third issues for Section I.4.c (Aggregate Interference to Satellite 
Receivers).
    6. Regarding the alleged absence of international consensus 
expressed by some of the commenting parties, the Commission notes that 
the 28 GHz band already has a primary worldwide mobile service 
allocation, which embodies a previously agreed consensus among 
International Telecommunication Union (ITU) members. Although World 
Radiocommunication Conference (WRC) 2015 (WRC-15) omitted 27.5-28.35 
GHz from a list of mmW bands that it invited ITU-Radiocommunication 
(ITU-R) to study for mobile service, the record in this proceeding 
makes it abundantly clear that there are significant benefits to 
authorizing mobile use in the 28 GHz band regardless of that 
international decision.
    7. Administrations and wireless industry representatives that have 
been major leaders in the mobile industry support authorization of 
mobile services in the 27.5-28.35 GHz band. Verizon notes that 
countries supporting mobile use in the band include South Korea, Japan, 
Sweden, Finland, and Singapore--``technology powerhouses with their 
sights set on 5G''--and argues that this Commission should not delay 
repurposing the 28 GHz band while its counterparts in those countries 
support their industries' efforts to develop mobile technologies for 
the band. Intel says that major markets like the U.S., Japan, and Korea 
are moving expeditiously, ``blazing the trail for mobile 5G services in 
the 28 GHz band, in spite of the WRC-15 decision not to study the 28 
GHz band leading up to WRC-19.'' Ericsson contends that, regardless of 
the outcome of WRC-15, spectrum from this general range very likely 
will be used for 5G around the world, as evidenced by the fact that 
Japan and Korea appear to be pressing ahead to use frequencies in this 
range for their Olympic Game deployments. Nokia expresses 
disappointment with the outcome of WRC-15, sees ``great potential'' for 
the 28 GHz band and urges the Commission to ``unlock the promise of 
that band for mobile use.'' Internationally, Huawei and Alcatel-Lucent 
are also focusing on the 28 GHz band as key spectrum for mobile use. T-
Mobile USA, whose majority owner is the flagship German 
telecommunications company, Deutsche Telekom, filed comments in this 
proceeding expressing its support for mobile services in the 28 GHz 
band. Other comments reflect near-unanimous support among carriers, 
equipment suppliers, and associations that represent them.
    8. The Commission acknowledges the comments of parties that 
emphasize the importance of international harmonization, but in this 
case, it appears there is sufficient international interest (including 
from Japan and South Korea) for using the 28 GHz band and adjacent 
bands to justify making the 28 GHz band available for mobile use. Intel 
and Ericsson both state that the

[[Page 79896]]

mobile industry could readily create integrated circuits with tuning 
ranges for various bands in that part of the spectrum, and the Republic 
of Korea submitted a proposal to WRC-15 stating that the ``frequency 
range from 24.25 GHz to 29.5 GHz proposed from regional groups could be 
implemented by one single device to facilitate global roaming around 
the year 2020.'' These kinds of capabilities are already being 
reflected in standards development. Microsoft explains that 3GPP 
release 13 will allow for carrier aggregation of multiple bands of 
spectrum, both licensed and unlicensed, in the 5 GHz band, and it says 
that, once 5G service is defined, the committee will likely extend its 
standards to encompass the millimeter wave bands. Microsoft argues that 
carriers should ultimately be able to aggregate low-, medium-, and 
high-band spectrum. The significant domestic and international interest 
in making the 28 GHz band available for new mobile uses clearly 
supports taking action in this Report and Order to create new flexible 
use licenses.
2. Licensing the 28 GHz Band
a. Use of Geographic Area Licensing
    9. The Commission adopted its proposal to implement geographic area 
licensing throughout the 28 GHz band because geographic area licensing 
will expedite deployment, provide licensees with the flexibility to 
provide a variety of services, and is consistent with the existing 
licensing scheme. One significant advantage to this approach is that 
the Commission can expedite use of the band for advanced services 
because it is consistent with the existing framework in this band.
    10. In contrast, if the Commission adopted a separate framework for 
mobile use of the band, the Commission needs to develop a Spectrum 
Access System (SAS), define the specific rights held by the existing 
licensees, and work out rules for coordination with the existing 
licensees. Adopting geographic area licensing for this band is also 
consistent with the Commission's goal of adopting a balanced licensing 
approach that includes licensed, unlicensed, and innovative sharing 
approaches across a variety of bands. For these reasons, the Commission 
is not adopting a 3.5 GHz-style SAS framework for this band.
    11. Similarly, the Commission declines to adopt Microsoft's 
proposal to create an unlicensed portion of the band. The Commission 
believes splitting the band into unlicensed and licensed segments would 
potentially hinder deployment by making it more difficult for licensees 
to use the full 850 megahertz of spectrum. The Commission nonetheless 
agrees that a balance between licensed and unlicensed usage is 
important, and as described below, the Commission is also making seven 
gigahertz of spectrum available for use by unlicensed devices in the 
64-71 GHz band, and create an opportunity for shared access in the 37-
37.6 GHz band segment.
b. License Area Size
    12. The Commission adopted counties as the license area size for 
Upper Microwave Flexible Use Service (UMFUS) licenses in the 28 GHz 
band. The Commission also adopted its proposal to subdivide existing 
LMDS licenses on a county basis. As the Commission explained in the 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), a county-based license affords a 
licensee the flexibility to develop localized services, allows for 
targeted deployments based on market forces and customer demand, and 
facilitates access by both smaller and larger carriers. In the 
Commission views, the claims of certain commenters that larger license 
areas will better fit the services contemplated for these bands lack 
specificity and do not take into account the potential need for 
targeted deployment. It is unclear that providers need to--or will want 
to--aggregate nationwide licenses, as mobile operations in the band may 
initially be deployed. On a mobile basis, this band is envisioned for 
mobile operations in denser population centers or around highway 
corridors. While it is true that county-sized licenses will result in 
more borders, the Commission adopted a power flux density (PFD) limit 
at the border that will facilitate coordination between licensees. 
Furthermore, no party offered evidence that there have been problems 
providing service near existing Basic Trading Area (BTA) borders. The 
Commission notes that licensees in other services regularly coordinate 
their operations along shared borders and have well established 
procedures for conducting this coordination. The Commission expects 
that licensees will be able to apply these same procedures in this band 
without any undue burden. To the extent existing BTA licensees do not 
believe it is economically viable to build within certain counties of a 
BTA, the Commission believes it would be appropriate to give other 
interested parties an opportunity to license and to make use of the 
spectrum. Finally, establishing smaller license areas is fair to 
existing licensees because those licensees are also obtaining valuable 
new rights and they are keeping the same bundle of rights they had 
previously. Overall, the Commission believes the benefits of smaller 
license areas for this specific band outweigh any administrative burden 
on licensees and the Commission.
    13. In this proceeding, the Commission is endeavoring to create a 
regulatory scheme that will suit the development of innovative wireless 
services for years to come. The Commission in recent years has sought 
greater consistency in its approach to geographic license area sizes to 
help providers aggregate licenses in a more targeted and efficient 
manner, gravitating toward license areas that are derived from Economic 
Area (EA) units. BTAs have only been used as the license area for a few 
commercial wireless services. Counties, however, are the base unit that 
make up common commercial wireless license sizes, including EAs and the 
new Partial Economic Area (PEA) license areas. There is also a 
practical advantage to issuing county-based licenses. Specifically, the 
Commission would be required to negotiate a new licensing agreement 
with Rand McNally to use BTAs in UMFUS. In recent years, the Commission 
has avoided using license areas controlled by third parties in order to 
eliminate the time and expense involved in negotiating such agreements.
3. Mobile Rights for Incumbents
    14. The Commission adopted its proposal to grant mobile operating 
rights to existing active LMDS licensees. This grant is in fulfillment 
of the Commission's original mobile allocation for 28 GHz and its 
stated expectation of allowing mobile use in the band in ``providing 
LMDS licensees with maximum flexibility in designing their systems.'' 
The Commission adopted the rules; therefore, licensees are able to 
provide mobile services consistent with part 30 licensing and technical 
rules. Granting mobile operating rights to existing licensees will 
expedite the deployment of service, minimize the difficulties involved 
in coordinating fixed and mobile deployments, and provide a uniform 
licensing scheme throughout the United States. The Commission remains 
concerned that awarding fixed and mobile rights separately would lead 
to disputes between fixed and mobile licensees that could make it more 
difficult for both licensees to provide service.
    15. The Commission recognizes that awarding mobile rights to 
incumbent licensees could be viewed as a windfall to those licensees, 
although the

[[Page 79897]]

Commission contemplated granting mobile rights when it first created 
LMDS. Here, the benefits of expediting service and ease of coordinating 
fixed and mobile service outweigh any foreseeable disadvantages of 
granting mobile rights to incumbents. In this instance, the Commission 
finds that expedition is particularly important because of the need to 
make mmW spectrum available for innovative and novel issues.
4. Satellite Terrestrial Sharing
a. Sharing With FSS (Fixed Satellite Service) Earth Stations
    16. The record demonstrates that FSS earth stations in the 28 GHz 
band can share the band with minimal impact on terrestrial operations. 
For example, EchoStar argues that 28 GHz Earth-to-space stations would 
not curtail the deployment of 5G systems outside a few very small non-
urban areas. EchoStar and ViaSat both estimate that terrestrial mobile 
stations could be deployed as close as 170 meters to their Earth-to-
space transmitters in the 28 GHz band. SES Americom suggests ``carving 
out some rural areas where future gateway earth stations can be 
licensed for use in the 28 GHz band.'' With respect to terrestrial 
operations, AT&T, Nokia, Samsung, T-Mobile, and Verizon estimate that 
the necessary separation distances between FSS earth stations and 
terrestrial deployments are between 50 and 400 meters depending on the 
type of earth stations. Therefore, the Commission finds that it is in 
the public interest to create rules that allow for continued and 
expanded sharing between terrestrial operations and FSS earth stations 
in the 28 GHz band.
    17. The Commission recognizes that sharing may be more difficult 
for non-geostationary satellite systems, such as the system operated by 
O3b. While O3b argues that it needs multiple sites in a county in order 
to serve customer locations, it ignores the Commission's decision that 
it was allowing FSS to access the 28 GHz band solely for the purpose of 
providing limited Earth-to-space gateway-type services. O3b had no 
reasonable expectation that the Commission would grant earth stations 
designed to serve customer locations priority over fixed LMDS services 
and mobile services that the Commission contemplated would become part 
of LMDS. O3b estimates that the preclusive distance for its gateway 
earth stations with respect to mmW mobile stations is between 1.2 and 
13.8 kilometers. Nonetheless, the Commission believes that sharing is 
feasible for O3b. First, as discussed below, the Commission is 
grandfathering O3b's existing earth stations in Texas and Hawaii. 
Second, O3b has the option of locating future earth stations in 
relatively remote areas. Third, O3b can obtain protection by purchasing 
an exclusive use terrestrial license at auction or by working with a 
licensee in the secondary market to partition a license area with 
sufficient size to allow it to deploy additional earth stations without 
impacting terrestrial operations, or enter into a different type of 
negotiated sharing arrangement. Fourth, O3b can take advantage of 
shielding or other mitigation techniques. Comsearch characterizes 
satellite operators' use of naturally occurring terrain features as 
follows:

    Before the great explosion of satellite communications for all 
types of uses, earth station sites were carefully selected with 
protection from interference the primary consideration. Most 
locations were many miles from the cities that they were serving, 
with the ideal earth station site being naturally shielded by 
terrain at a spot, which was calculated to be virtually free of 
interfering signals. For most types of communication, this type of 
isolation is not required, although it is still true that the most 
important aspect of a site is its shielding.

    There are many naturally occurring terrain features that are 
capable of providing terrain shielding for NGSO gateway stations and 
shielding can also be provided by creating berms or other man-made 
barriers.
    18. In short, while allowing new earth stations in the 28 GHz band 
is not without cost to terrestrial licensees, the Commission believes 
that the small area encumbered by a new earth station (with the limits 
noted below) will minimize such costs and will allow both satellite and 
terrestrial services to expand and coexist. Furthermore, satellite 
operators deployed in this band knowing that they were secondary 
licensees with respect to LMDS, that the Commission had chosen to allow 
only limited satellite use, and that the Commission had long envisioned 
allowing mobile use in the band. Despite these facts, below the 
Commission creates a path to further expand satellite gateways that 
could add thousands of new sites because the Commission believes the 
relatively small protection zones will have little impact on 
terrestrial use.
b. Licensing of FSS Earth Stations
    19. The Commission maintains the current status of FSS, and as 
described below, creates new opportunities for continued expansion of 
FSS earth stations on a protected basis. Upgrading the FSS designation 
to co-primary status, even if limited to individually licensed earth 
stations, would be inconsistent with terrestrial use of this band and 
the Commission's decision to facilitate expanded terrestrial use, and 
would not effectively facilitate sharing in the band. The Commission 
believes the 28 GHz band will play a vital role in the deployment of 
advanced mmW services, and fully upgrading FSS under the Commission's 
service rules to co-primary status would be inconsistent with this goal 
and would be unnecessary to meet the FSS community's needs.
    20. The Commission recognizes, however, that FSS operators rely on 
this band for gateway connectivity and have invested significant 
capital in the band and will continue to do so in the future. The 
Commission believes there is value in creating meaningful, targeted 
opportunities to deploy additional FSS earth stations in the band 
without harming terrestrial operations. The NPRM's proposals 
encouraging satellite operators to participate in county-sized (or 
smaller) market transactions were predicated in part on the vast 
protection zones that satellite operators have traditionally claimed 
were necessary, either to protect their operations or to protect others 
from them. Here, there is a consensus that much smaller protection 
zones are needed. EchoStar and ViaSat have both estimated that 
terrestrial mobile stations could be deployed as close as 170 meters to 
their Earth-to-space transmitters in the 28 GHz band. Most other 
satellite operators either support those specific calculations, agree 
in general terms that the necessary preclusive zones can be very small, 
or state that gateway earth stations can be located in rural areas far 
away from the urban cores where mmW mobile operations will be most 
viable.
    21. The ability of satellite earth stations and terrestrial 
operations to coexist in close proximity to each other has two 
significant ramifications. First, it should be possible for satellite 
and terrestrial services to share the 28 GHz band with de minimis 
impairment of each other's operations. Second, the disparity between 
the county-sized license areas the Commission has established for 28 
GHz UMFUS licensees and the extremely small areas required for FSS 
earth stations makes it inappropriate for the Commission to rely 
exclusively on a market-based mechanism for assigning rights to FSS 
earth stations, although the Commission retains this option as one 
means through which FSS operators may expand.
    22. In addition to acquiring the terrestrial license rights, the

[[Page 79898]]

Commission also concludes that it would be efficient to continue to 
authorize gateway satellite earth stations under the existing part 25 
first-come, first-served basis. The Commission adopts a mechanism under 
which FSS earth stations will, so long as they comply with conditions 
noted below, be able to deploy new gateways in limited circumstances 
without being required to take any additional actions to provide 
interference protection to UMFUS licensees. The Commission builds this 
upon record support for several different approaches to sharing in the 
28 GHz band.
    23. The authorization of FSS earth stations in the 27.5-28.35 GHz 
band that will not be required to take any additional actions to 
provide interference protection to UMFUS licenses is subject to the 
following conditions. First, the Commission will authorize no more than 
three locations in each county where FSS may deploy earth stations on a 
protected basis. Second, an FSS applicant must demonstrate in its 
license application that the permitted interference zone around its 
earth station, which the Commission will define as the contour within 
which FSS licensees generate a PFD, at 10 meters above ground level, of 
no more than -77.6 dBm/m\2\/MHz, together with any preexisting earth 
stations located in the same county on a protected basis, will, in the 
aggregate, cover no more than 0.1 percent of the population of the 
county license area where the earth station is located.\1\ Third, the 
applicant must show that the permitted interference zone does not 
infringe upon any major event venue, arterial street, interstate or 
U.S. highway, urban mass transit route, passenger railroad, or cruise 
ship port. The Commission notes that Verizon supports prohibiting 
siting earth stations near athletic and/or entertainment venues, 
interstate and U.S. highways, and port facilities. The Commission 
believes the other locations the Commission has identified are 
similarly areas where the Commission could expect to have high demand 
for wireless services. Fourth, prior to filing its application, if 
there is an existing 28 GHz UMFUS licensee in the county where it is 
proposing to locate its earth station, the earth station applicant must 
coordinate its operation with the existing UMFUS licensees using the 
coordination procedures contained in Sec.  101.103(d) of the 
Commission's rules. The purpose of the coordination is to ensure that 
the earth station will not interfere with existing facilities operating 
under the UMFUS license. The Commission expects that UMFUS licensees 
will cooperate in good faith in the coordination process and only raise 
objections if there is a legitimate concern about interference to 
existing UMFUS facilities or failure to comply with the criteria listed 
above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The International Bureau will issue a public notice seeking 
comment on the appropriate methodology to calculate the 0.1 percent 
population limit and further details regarding earth station 
interference zone calculation (including propagation models, e.g. 
free space versus probabilistic), and will also seek comment on best 
practices for earth station siting to minimize the impact on UMFU 
services, colocation of earth stations, and accommodating multiple 
earth station interference zones without exceeding 0.1 percent of 
population in a given county.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    24. These conditions are designed to provide FSS licensees with 
substantial opportunities to expand their limited use of the 28 GHz 
band to deploy earth stations that do not have to protect terrestrial 
services, while minimizing the impact on terrestrial operations. Since 
there are over 3,000 counties in the United States, with a potential 
for up to three locations in each county, FSS licensees would have many 
choices for earth station locations. Furthermore, even with the 
conditions the Commission has imposed, FSS operators will have great 
flexibility in selecting earth station locations that meet their needs. 
Taking ViaSat's 160-meter radius estimate as a point of departure, the 
typical interference zone for terrestrial operations around a gateway 
earth station would cover about 0.08 square kilometers. As ViaSat 
notes, this zone could be reduced further by reducing the preclusive 
distance around the earth station, using mitigation techniques such as 
shielding. Even without such reductions, the interference zone would 
represent only about 0.0033 percent of the area of an average U.S. 
county. If one were to assume an even population distribution 
throughout every county, ViaSat's interference zone would cover no more 
than 0.1 percent of the population of any county that covers more than 
80 square kilometers. There are only four counties in the United States 
that cover less than 80 square kilometers. In addition, any 
interference zone will be allowed to accommodate multiple FSS earth 
stations that could, for instance, be serving different satellites in 
the geostationary orbit, as long as these earth stations, in the 
aggregate, do not cause the interference zone to exceed the limits the 
Commission adopted in this Report and Order.
    25. Conversely, the Commission believes that allowing FSS earth 
stations to share the 28 GHz band under these conditions will not 
unduly hinder terrestrial deployment in the band. The Commission notes 
that existing LMDS licensees are obtaining valuable mobile rights, and 
the value of those rights far outweighs any impairment imposed by this 
sharing mechanism. In addition, under the rules the Commission adopted, 
the Commission believes that FSS operations will encumber only a small 
geographic area and a small portion of the population of the license 
area. While the Commission maintains flexibility for FSS operators to 
choose the areas that fit within these conditions, current and future 
licensees will have some ability to predict the potential impact on the 
license area.
    26. Other than applying those conditions, the Commission does not 
propose to designate the locations of any county's satellite permitted 
interference zones in advance--i.e., the Commission will leave the 
choices of locations to the discretion of the satellite operators, 
conditional upon the licensees constructing and activating their earth 
stations within 12 months, pursuant to Sec.  25.133 of the Commission's 
rules.
    27. The Commission also notes that FSS operators will have other 
mechanisms available to deploy earth stations that do not have to 
protect terrestrial services. The Commission will adopt its proposal to 
grant such rights to any FSS earth stations for which the FSS operator 
also holds the UMFUS license that covers the earth station's permitted 
interference zone. To the extent FSS operators and UMFUS licensees 
enter into private agreements, their relationship will be governed by 
those agreements. Finally, FSS earth stations may continue to be 
authorized without the benefit of an interference zone. In this 
respect, taking into account the small size of the area around an earth 
station where terrestrial operations would not be protected, the 
Commission encourages UMFUS licensees to be flexible in providing 
certainty to the operation of FSS earth stations in areas where they do 
not intend to deploy terrestrial services. The Commission emphasizes 
that these FSS earth stations will have no expectation of interfering 
rights and will have to cease operation if requested by UMFUS licensees 
at any time on the basis of harmful interference to their services.
    28. The Commission also modifies its proposal in the NPRM for 
treatment of existing FSS gateway earth stations. Since the Commission 
is no longer requiring FSS operators to obtain an UMFUS license in 
order to obtain the right to interfere, the Commission will not grant 
UMFUS licenses to existing FSS earth station holders. Instead, the 
Commission will grandfather all

[[Page 79899]]

existing 28 GHz FSS earth stations authorized as of the adoption date 
(July 14, 2016) of this Report and Order and grant them the right to 
operate under the terms of their existing authorizations without taking 
into account possible interference to UMFUS operations. The Commission 
will also grandfather pending applications for 28 GHz earth stations 
filed prior to the adoption date of this Report and Order if such 
applications are subsequently granted pursuant to the existing part 25 
rules (i.e., without regard to the criteria the Commission adopted). 
The Commission notes that in many instances, these earth stations are 
used to provide valuable services to customers. In areas where there is 
no existing LMDS licensee, a new UMFUS licensee will have the ability 
to take the existing FSS earth station into account before it acquires 
the license or plans deployment. Even in areas where there is an 
existing LMDS licensee, Samsung's analysis demonstrates that existing 
earth stations will have a small impact on the terrestrial licensee. 
Finally, the Commission notes that AT&T and Verizon support 
grandfathering existing earth stations.
    29. In adopting these rules, the Commission acknowledges with 
appreciation the efforts that AT&T and EchoStar have made to forge a 
compromise proposal that would be acceptable to other parties. The 
Commission declines to adopt their compromise proposal because it would 
have provided less predictability regarding the locations of future 
earth stations, and it would have limited the ability of FSS to deploy 
near population centers even if the deployment affected a small 
percentage (or even none) of the population. By contrast, the sharing 
mechanism that the Commission adopted will provide predictability to 
terrestrial licensees while giving FSS the opportunity to greatly 
expand their operations to over 9,500 locations. The Commission 
believes the rules that the Commission adopted will encourage intensive 
use of the band by both UMFUS and FSS licensees.
c. Aggregate Interference to Satellite Receivers
    30. The second issue that must be considered with respect to 
satellite-terrestrial system coexistence is aggregate skyward 
interference to satellite receivers. There is a concern on the record 
that upward transmissions from large numbers of terrestrial stations 
will, in the aggregate, generate enough power to be received at the 
satellite's receiver, thus degrading the satellite's performance. The 
most detailed concerns about aggregate interference are raised in ex 
parte presentations by O3b, SES, ViaSat, and a group referring to 
themselves as Satellite Operators. For the reasons noted below, the 
Commission concludes that the potential for aggregate interference 
rising to the level of harmful interference is unlikely and thus is not 
a basis for refusing to authorize mobile service in the 28 GHz band, 
and the Commission declines to establish any regulatory limit on 
aggregate power levels.
    31. Under the Commission's rules, FSS is secondary to LMDS fixed 
and mobile operations in the 28 GHz band. The Commission's rules 
specifically state, ``FSS is secondary to LMDS in [the 27.5-28.35 GHz] 
band.'' Internationally, this band is allocated to the FSS and the 
fixed and mobile services on a co-primary basis. The Commission 
recognizes that there are non-U.S. licensed FSS networks in this band, 
and that the United States needs to protect those systems consistent 
with its relevant international obligations. This framework exists in 
other bands where FSS shares spectrum with terrestrial services 
internationally, such as the C-band. Contrary to Lockheed Martin's 
assertions, the Commission is not violating U.S. international treaty 
obligations by adopting rules that will enable the provision of UMFUS 
in the 28 GHz band without first resolving potential aggregate 
interference issues. As discussed below, the Commission concludes that 
the risk of aggregate interference is low. In the event, however, that 
there is an instance where a non-U.S.-licensed FSS network receives 
harmful interference, the Commission intends to address such 
interference in accordance with applicable U.S. international treaties, 
and will monitor industry developments to that end. The Commission 
rejects ViaSat's argument that the Commission granted FSS primary 
status over mobile operations. ViaSat relies in part on the following 
passage from the LMDS First Report and Order:

    We are designating discrete spectrum bands for specific types of 
systems. Services designated for domestic licensing priority are 
specified in capital letters in the graphic depiction of the band 
plan. These services have licensing priority vis-[agrave]-vis any 
other type of service allocated domestically or internationally in 
the band. Lower-case letters indicate services in a particular band 
segment which also have licensing priority vis-[agrave]-vis any 
third service allocated domestically or internationally in the band, 
but have no licensing priority over the service in capital letters 
in the band segment and must operate on a non-interference basis and 
must accept interference vis-[agrave]-vis that service.

Contrary to ViaSat's view, the Commission can, and in fact did, 
establish priority for mobile services through its service rules. 
ViaSat claims that FSS retains primary status over any new mobile 
service, because the Commission established priority only for LMDS. 
This argument fails because mobile service is part of LMDS, and is not 
a ``third service'' or a ``new service.'' The mobile allocation already 
existed at the time of the LMDS First Report and Order, but the 
Commission made no distinction between fixed and mobile service in 
terms of priority--it established priority for a terrestrial service 
over a satellite service. The Commission contemplated that LMDS, the 
designated primary service, could eventually obtain mobile rights. 
Indeed, it ``kn[e]w of no reason why we would not allow mobile 
operations if they are proposed and we obtain a record in support'' 
thereof. It declined to authorize mobile operations ``for now,'' not 
because of concerns about coexistence with FSS (which it had already 
designated as secondary due to the infeasibility of sharing at that 
time), but because it was unclear that the technology existed to 
facilitate mobile operations and whether mobile operations could share 
with fixed operations. The actions, the Commission is taking, are 
precisely the actions the Commission contemplated when it established 
service rules for LMDS--adding mobile rights to existing LMDS licenses.
    32. The Commission also notes that if the Commission had intended 
to make mobile operations secondary to FSS, it could have very clearly 
done so by explicitly stating that FSS had priority over the mobile 
allocation. In the LMDS First Report and Order, when the Commission 
intended to discuss the mobile allocation, it specifically referred to 
the mobile allocation. If the Commission intended to make mobile 
secondary to FSS, it could have specifically referred to mobile instead 
of a ``third service.'' Indeed, when the Commission talked of mobile 
services in the 28 GHz band, it said that authorizing such services 
``would be consistent with the Commission's goal of providing LMDS 
licensees with maximum flexibility in designing their systems.'' If the 
Commission intended to treat mobile services independently of LMDS, it 
would not have referred to providing flexibility to LMDS licensees.
    33. FSS operators received multiple notices of their secondary 
status. Indeed, in the LMDS First Report and

[[Page 79900]]

Order, the Commission specifically rejected a request from GE Americom 
to provide some protection to FSS gateways as ``inconsistent with the 
designation of FSS for secondary licensing priority in the 27.5-28.35 
GHz band.'' As ViaSat recognizes, FSS license conditions in the 28 GHz 
band explicitly state that FSS operations in the 28 GHz band are on an 
``unprotected, non-harmful interference basis relative to LMDS.'' The 
NPRM in this proceeding noted, ``Twenty stations are licensed for 
Earth-to-space transmissions on a secondary basis in the 28 GHz band. . 
. .'' That much being said, the Commission recognizes that FSS 
operators use the 28 GHz band to provide services and intend to provide 
additional services in the future.
    34. However, the record in this proceeding does not demonstrate 
that the rules that the Commission adopted would significantly risk 
harmful interference to satellite operations because of aggregate 
interference received at the satellite receiver. Under the existing 
rules, LMDS stations have a maximum authorized transmit power of 55 dBW 
(85 dBm), versus the 75 dBm the Commission adopted. Furthermore, LMDS 
can operate in either point-to-point or point-to-multipoint mode, and 
there are no existing limits on upward emissions. In contrast, the 
Commission adopted lower power limits for base-station and mobile 
operations in UMFUS. Furthermore, the systems contemplated for these 
bands have several characteristics that will tend to limit 
transmissions towards satellite receivers. As noted in the NPRM, most 
industry evaluations of potential mmW mobile base station deployments 
appear to assume that such stations' antennas will be tilted downward 
at a slight angle, typically from a street lamp pole or a location on a 
building at a similar height. Intel explains that this configuration is 
necessary not only to direct transmissions toward user equipment but 
also to limit interference between adjacent cellular base stations. In 
fact, says Intel, failure to adopt this downtilt configuration would 
impair throughput to users at cell edges by about 60 percent. Although 
ViaSat expresses concern that in some limited locations mobile base 
stations might be directed skyward to provide coverage to users in the 
upper floors of tall buildings, because of this need for downward 
coverage such mobile providers can rely on wired in-building facilities 
where necessary. Mobile base stations in this band will probably use 
antenna systems that employ dynamic beamforming techniques to produce 
beams as narrow as 1.0 degree, which will substantially reduce the 
likelihood that such beams will point directly at satellite receivers. 
User equipment will also employ antenna arrays to generate dynamic 
beamforming, varying both azimuth and elevation in order to maintain 
signal connections with their base stations. Again, terrestrial 
operators are likely to deploy this technology of their own accord: By 
Intel's analysis, choosing not to use dynamic beamforming technology 
would reduce throughput at cell edges by about 70 percent. Base 
stations and user equipment will also likely employ dynamic power 
control, both to avoid draining batteries and to limit intersystem 
interference. In fact, both base stations and user equipment could be 
entirely silent much of the time; terrestrial operators report that, in 
current deployments, network loading rarely exceeds 30 percent. All of 
these features will limit the extent of skyward transmissions from 
terrestrial mobile systems.
    35. In addition, it is important to recognize that most mmW 
transmissions will likely not occur in environments that have line of 
sight to satellites. By some estimates, as much as 80 percent of 
smartphone use occurs indoors, with much of the remainder occurring in 
vehicles. Because mmW signals are heavily attenuated by exterior walls, 
roofs and windows, signals originating from handheld smartphones will 
be largely confined within any buildings or vehicles where they are 
used, and would need to be relayed to mobile base stations by other 
devices with exterior antennas that will likely have sufficient 
beamforming ability to limit skyward transmissions. In principle, 
spilling signal power uselessly into outer space would represent a 
source of inefficiency, so it is likely that dynamically beamformed 
signals will be aimed at receivers on the ground or not far above it. 
The most vulnerable satellites--those situated at elevations close to 
the horizon--will be protected further by the path losses that 
terrestrial signals will encounter in the cluttered environments of 
street canyons, suburban foliage, and other obstacles.
    36. The Commission has reviewed the studies submitted by the 
various parties, including the satellite operators. As discussed in the 
Technical Rules section, infra, the Commission concludes that the 
various studies submitted by the parties do not support establishment 
of an aggregate interference limit. From the satellite operators' 
perspective, part of the challenge is that mmW mobile is a new, rapidly 
evolving technology, and the terrestrial mobile industry is still 
developing system designs and propagation models. Even so, there has 
been substantial progress in that regard, and the interference models 
submitted by satellite operators in this proceeding do not take into 
account prospective features of mmW mobile systems that are readily 
accessible on the public record. O3b, for example, assumes that mmW 
mobile user equipment will employ no beamforming at all, and will 
generate omnidirectional signals. Interference models submitted by 
other parties do not adequately account for, and in some cases do not 
take into account at all, antenna beamwidths, downtilts, beamforming, 
power control, traffic patterns, number of simultaneously transmitting 
stations, the obstruction losses that terrestrial signals are likely to 
encounter before reaching satellites at low elevations, and the fact 
that the majority of transmissions will occur indoors. Terrestrial 
operators have every incentive to design networks that direct the 
signals they are transmitting to the locations of the receivers--either 
another fixed point on a vertical structure, or a mobile unit within a 
couple of meters of the ground--especially given the propagation 
characteristics of these frequencies. Furthermore, mobile units, which 
are likely to be transmitting at angles more skyward, are operating at 
powers significantly lower than base stations. These are both true 
regardless of the types of systems that are ultimately deployed in 
these bands. Nonetheless, given the wide variety of deployments and 
uses the Commission expects to see in these bands, it would be 
inappropriate to universally mandate these design features in every 
deployment, in the absence of more credible support for the proposition 
that satellite systems will receive harmful interference from mmW 
mobile systems.
    37. The Commission's decision not to set specific limits on 
aggregate interference is consistent with the Commission's treatment of 
that issue in other bands. In AWS-3, the Commission declined to 
establish aggregate power limits to protect Federal satellites in the 
1761-1780 MHz band because it was unlikely that aggregate interference 
was likely to occur. Similarly, in the 10.7-11.7 GHz band, which is 
shared between FSS and Fixed Service (FS), the Commission held with 
respect to concerns regarding a different type of aggregate 
interference: ``[W]e view rule changes that would allow greater FS use 
of the 11 GHz band as beneficial to the

[[Page 79901]]

public interest, so long as existing users would not be harmed.'' 
Similarly, the Commission sees great public benefit to more intensive 
terrestrial use of the 28 GHz band where terrestrial use is the primary 
designated service in the band.
    38. The Commission has concluded that the satellite industry has 
not shown that it has a legal right to protection from aggregate 
interference or that harmful aggregate interference is likely to occur 
from the mobile operations now being authorized for LMDS. The 
Commission also recognizes that SES, EchoStar, and ViaSat believe that 
satellite and mobile operations can coexist. Nonetheless, the 
Commission is sensitive to the concerns raised. The Commission notes 
that the satellite and wireless industries have begun the process of 
modeling the terrestrial systems under consideration for this band to 
provide further information concerning their potential impact on 
satellites. The Commission encourages both industries to continue 
working cooperatively on this issue, including by submitting any 
relevant data demonstrating changes in the amount of aggregate 
interference on record as UMFUS services are deployed. The Commission 
directs the International Bureau (IB), the Office of Engineering and 
Technology (OET), and the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (WTB) to 
jointly establish a separate docket that parties can use to file the 
relevant data and analyses, and the Commission reserves the right to 
revisit this issue should additional information or other circumstances 
warrant further Commission review or action.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ In the NPRM, the Commission also sought comment on the 
possibility of repealing the prohibition on FSS user equipment in 
the 28 GHz band. While there has been considerable comment on this 
issue, in light of the evolving nature of technology and deployment 
in the band, the Commission does not believe the issue is ripe for 
action at this time. Accordingly, the Commission will consider this 
issue in the future, either in this proceeding or in a separate 
proceeding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. Band Plan
    39. The Commission will license the 28 GHz band as two 425 
megahertz blocks. The Commission believes 425 megahertz channels will 
be sufficient for a licensee to provide the type of high data rate 
services and other innovative uses and applications contemplated for 
this spectrum. The fact that several carriers support dividing the 
bands into multiple blocks supports that conclusion. The Commission 
also agrees with T-Mobile that there are benefits to competition in 
allowing multiple licensees to provide service in the 28 GHz band.
    40. The Commission emphasizes that existing LMDS Channel A1 
licensees will receive licenses for both channels, so they will 
maintain their existing license rights. To the extent licensees are 
interested in having a contiguous block of 850 megahertz of spectrum, 
they are free to acquire both licenses, subject to compliance with the 
Commission's spectrum aggregation policies.

B. 39 GHz Band (38.6-40 GHz)

    41. In the NPRM, the Commission proposed to develop service rules 
for mobile operations in the 38.6-40 GHz band (the ``39 GHz Band''). 
This band is currently allocated to the fixed, fixed satellite (space-
to-Earth), and mobile services on a primary basis for non-Federal use. 
There are Federal FSS (space-to-earth) and Mobile Satellite Service 
(MSS) (space-to-Earth) allocations in the 39.5-40 GHz band, limited to 
military systems.
    42. The 39 GHz band is licensed by EA and consists of 14 blocks of 
50 by 50 megahertz channels. Out of the 2,464 possible terrestrial 
fixed service EA licenses available in this band (14 channel pairs for 
each of 176 EAs) only 870 licenses currently exist. Other licenses were 
voluntarily cancelled or terminated for failure to meet substantial 
service requirements. In addition, there are currently 229 active 
Rectangular Service Area (RSA) licenses that predate the creation of 
the EA licenses in which the licensees self-defined their service area, 
and where they retain the exclusive right to operate. The populations 
in licensed areas (both EA and RSA licenses) vary by channel, but in 
aggregate they cover about 49 percent of the U.S. population. The 
Commission has previously indicated that licensees of the band could 
have the flexibility to provide mobile service and stated the belief 
that ``the issue of technical compatibility of fixed and mobile 
operations within a service area is one that can and should be resolved 
by the licensee.'' The Commission declined, however, to permit mobile 
operations until it conducted a separate proceeding to resolve any 
inter-service and inter-licensee interference issues. As a result, no 
mobile operations currently exist in the 39 GHz band. To accommodate 
high-density fixed terrestrial systems under a ``soft segmentation'' 
band plan, the Commission has established lower PFD limits for 
satellite transmissions in the 37.5-40 GHz band than in other satellite 
bands. The Commission notes that there are no commercial satellite 
operations in the band.
1. Suitability for Mobile Service
    43. The Commission will authorize mobile operation in the 39 GHz 
band (38.6-40 GHz), and the Commission will issue new licenses granting 
existing and new 39 GHz licensees both fixed and mobile rights. The 
Commission believes that the significant bandwidth available in this 
band will help to accommodate the expected continued rise in demand for 
mobile data. Commenters, including incumbent terrestrial licensees, 
overwhelmingly support opening the band for mobile use and expanding 
their reach to mobile. The Commission agrees and believes the band can 
be used by both mobile and satellite because satellite use can be 
accommodated with minimal impact on terrestrial service. The Commission 
created the service rules to enable such mobile use, and the Commission 
detailed the means by which satellite must cooperate with new mobile 
services in these bands to reduce interference and improve service.
2. Licensing the 39 GHz Band
a. Use of Geographic Area Licensing
    44. The Commission adopted geographic area licenses that will grant 
licensees the flexibility to provide fixed and mobile services. As with 
the 28 GHz band, the Commission finds that in this band, geographic 
area licensing will expedite deployment, provide licensees with the 
flexibility to provide a variety of services, and is consistent with 
the existing licensing scheme in the band. The Commission will maintain 
the current co-primary Federal FSS and MSS allocations and associated 
regulations in this band. The Commission also finds that the presence 
of incumbent geographic area licenses in a large part of the country 
renders the 39 GHz band a poor candidate for implementing an SAS-based 
sharing model.
b. License Area Size
    45. The Commission will license the 39 GHz band using PEAs, because 
the Commission finds that use of this license area size will facilitate 
access to spectrum and the rapid deployment of service in the band. 
PEAs are smaller than BTAs or EAs, and therefore are more realistically 
obtainable by smaller bidders, yet are larger than counties which 
various commenters deem too small. Licensing the 39 GHz band on a PEA 
basis strikes the appropriate balance between facilitating access to 
spectrum by both large and small providers and simplifying frequency 
coordination while incentivizing investment in, and rapid deployment 
of, new technologies. PEAs also nest into

[[Page 79902]]

EAs but can also be broken down into counties, allowing operators to 
combine or partition their PEAs into the license areas of their choice. 
The Commission believes that the size and ability to combine/partition 
will aid in the rapid deployment of these licenses. The Commission's 
decision to license the 39 GHz band on a PEA basis is distinguishable 
from the Commission's decision to use counties as the license area in 
the 28 GHz band, because, as previously discussed, the latter band is 
currently licensed by BTAs and cannot readily be reformed into either 
EAs or PEAs.
3. Mobile Rights for Incumbents
    46. The Commission adopted its proposal to grant mobile operating 
rights to existing active 39 GHz licensees for the same reasons the 
Commission granted mobile operating rights to LMDS incumbent licensees. 
Granting mobile operating rights to existing licensees will expedite 
the deployment of service, minimize the difficulties involved in 
coordinating fixed and mobile deployments, and provide a uniform 
licensing scheme throughout the United States. In contrast, separating 
fixed and mobile rights through assignment of overlay licenses would 
delay the implementation of mobile service. The Commission remains 
concerned that awarding fixed and mobile rights separately would lead 
to disputes between fixed and mobile licensees that could make it more 
difficult for both licensees to provide service.
    47. The Commission recognizes that awarding mobile rights to 
incumbent licensees could be viewed as a windfall to those licensees, 
although the Commission contemplated granting mobile rights when it 
first created LMDS. Here, the benefits of expediting service and 
facilitating the coordination of fixed and mobile service outweigh any 
potential disadvantages of granting mobile rights to incumbents.
4. Non-Federal Satellite Terrestrial Sharing--Licensing of Gateway 
Earth Stations
    48. The NPRM invited comments on three issues relating to FSS use 
of the radiofrequency spectrum from 37.5 GHz to 40 GHz, encompassing 
both the 38.6-40 GHz (39 GHz) band and the 37-38.6 GHz (37 GHz) band. 
The first question was whether the Commission should make any changes 
to its treatment of gateway earth station applications; the second, 
whether it would be reasonable to eliminate the prohibition against 
ubiquitous deployment of user equipment; and the third question, 
whether it would be feasible to allow satellite operators to increase 
their PFDs above existing limits during heavy rain storms. In none of 
those cases did the Commission foresee any reason to differentiate 
between the 37 GHz and 39 GHz bands with respect to satellite sharing 
issues.
    49. The U.S. Table of Frequency Allocations accords co-primary 
status to FSS earth stations in the 37.5-40 GHz frequencies, but 
Commission rules provide that gateway earth stations in the 39 GHz band 
may be deployed only if the FSS licensee obtains a 39 GHz license for 
the area where the earth station will be located, or if it enters into 
an agreement with the corresponding 39 GHz licensee. The Commission 
mentioned the changes that the NPRM was proposing for the licensing of 
satellite operations in the 28 GHz band and sought comment on whether 
similar changes should be adopted for the 37.5-40 GHz channel groups. 
The NPRM asked whether the Commission should establish a waiver process 
by which non-Federal FSS earth stations in the 37.5-40 GHz bands could 
acquire co-primary status in areas where there is no geographic service 
area licensee, if they can demonstrate that doing so would not have a 
negative impact on future terrestrial service. The Commission asked if 
the fact that 37.5-40 GHz FSS operations are space-to-Earth, rather 
than Earth-to-space as in the 28 GHz band, should lead to different 
answers to these questions. The Commission also sought comment on any 
other changes it should make to the existing rules.
    50. Commenters acknowledge that the space-to-Earth nature of 
satellite operations in the 37.5-40 GHz bands means that it is earth 
stations that need protection against interfering signals from 
terrestrial operations rather than the opposite situation that applies 
for Earth-to-space operations in the 28 GHz band. EchoStar calculates 
that satellite earth stations in the 37.5-40 GHz band will need 
exclusion zones with radii extending no more than about two kilometers. 
EchoStar states this radius in the 37.5-40 GHz bands is about 12 times 
the radius (170 meters) circumscribing the exclusion zone that EchoStar 
says is required for earth stations in the 28 GHz band. The areas 
required for the resulting exclusion zones would be about 138 times as 
large--12.6 square kilometers (4.9 square miles) for the 37.5-40 GHz 
bands versus 0.09 square kilometers (0.03 square miles) for the 28 GHz 
band. By comparison with the 28 GHz band, therefore, accommodating 
satellite earth stations in the 39 GHz band is approximately two orders 
of magnitude more difficult.
    51. The smallest counties mentioned in the Commission's discussion 
of satellite interference zones for the 28 GHz band each cover about 80 
square kilometers. The exclusion area that EchoStar says is required 
for the 37.5-40 GHz frequencies would cover about 16 percent of such a 
county--a proportion that could seriously impair the growth prospects 
for mmW mobile. The challenge is less daunting when the Commission 
considers the possibility of authorizing earth station sites on a PEA 
basis rather than a county basis. The average PEA in the 48 contiguous 
U.S. states covers about 18,692 square kilometers (7,217 square miles). 
Therefore, the requisite exclusion zone would cover about 0.0674 
percent of the average PEA's land mass in the contiguous U.S. If people 
were evenly distributed across this hypothetical average PEA, 
substantially less than 0.1 percent of its population would fall in the 
earth station's exclusion zone.
    52. These calculations show that some PEAs should be able to host a 
39 GHz earth station without placing more than 0.1 percent of the PEA's 
population in the earth station's exclusion zone. Most PEAs cover 
substantially less territory than the average PEA does; i.e., even for 
some PEAs, a five square-mile exclusion zone might affect an 
unacceptably high proportion of their populations. But satellite 
operators will not necessarily need to deploy 39 GHz earth stations in 
the smaller, more densely populated PEAs. For satellite gateway earth 
stations in particular, the sine qua non is not proximity to population 
centers, per se, but access to long-haul, high data-rate Internet 
facilities. Direct access to long-haul Internet nodes is available not 
just in major population centers but also in some of the more remote 
parts of the U.S. Many of those nodes are in places with comparatively 
low population densities--i.e., near areas where it should be possible 
to deploy earth stations without creating exclusion zones that affect 
unacceptably high proportions of the population. In addition, as the 
Commission suggested for the 28 GHz band, satellite operators can 
substantially reduce the sizes of the exclusion zones that they require 
by constructing artificial site shields or by taking advantage of 
naturally occurring terrain features. Spatial analysis software can 
process digital elevation data to identify geographic depressions, 
which are capable of providing natural site-shielding in all 
directions. For earth stations that communicate only with 
geosynchronous satellites, more limited site shielding would typically 
suffice. In

[[Page 79903]]

addition, satellite operators may continue to protect their earth 
stations from interference using any of four market-oriented 
mechanisms: Purchasing geographic area licenses at auction, acquiring 
licenses from existing licensees, obtaining partitioned segments of 
existing geographic area licenses from existing licensees, or obtaining 
contractual agreements from nearby licensees not to interfere into 
their earth station operations.
    53. Based on those considerations, the Commission will authorize 
non-Federal satellite earth stations in the 39 GHz band on a first-
come, first-served basis that will entitle them to protection from 
terrestrial transmissions subject to the following conditions.\3\ 
First, the earth station applicant must define a protection zone in its 
application around its earth station where no terrestrial operations 
may be located. The FSS applicant may self-define this protection zone, 
but it must demonstrate using reasonable engineering methods that the 
designated protection zone is no larger than necessary to protect its 
earth station. Second, the Commission will authorize a maximum of three 
protection zones in each PEA, so the applicant must demonstrate that 
there are no more than two existing protection zones in the PEA or 
demonstrate that its protection zone will be contiguous to any 
preexisting satellite protection zone. Third, the applicant must 
demonstrate the existing and proposed protection zones, in the 
aggregate, will not cover more than 0.1 percent of the PEA's 
population.\4\ Fourth, the applicant must show that the protection zone 
does not infringe upon any major event venue, arterial street, 
interstate or U.S. highway, urban mass transit route, passenger 
railroad, or cruise ship port. Finally, the earth station applicant 
must coordinate with terrestrial fixed and mobile licensees whose 
license areas overlap with the protection zone, in order to ensure that 
the protection zone does not encompass existing terrestrial operations. 
The coordination requirements will be based on the Commission's 
existing requirements contained in Sec.  101.103(d) of the Commission's 
rules. If the earth station is authorized, UMFUS licensees will be 
prohibited from placing facilities within the protection zone absent 
consent from the FSS operator, and the FSS operator must respond in 
good faith to requests to place facilities within a protection zone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Commission adopted a new footnote, NG63, to the 
Allocation Table that reflects the existing limitation to gateway 
earth stations. See 47 CFR 25.202(a)(1) n.3.
    \4\ The IB will issue a public notice seeking comment on the 
appropriate methodology to calculate the 0.1 percent population 
limit and will also seek comment on best practices for earth station 
siting to minimize impact on UMFU services, colocation of earth 
stations, and accommodating multiple earth station interference 
zones without exceeding 0.1 percent of population in a given PEA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. Band Plan
    54. The Commission will create seven 200 megahertz bands out of the 
39 GHz band (38.6-40 GHz). The Commission finds that this channel size 
is large enough to take advantage of the data throughput capacity of 
these bands yet yields a sufficient quantity of channels in the band to 
provide access to multiple operators simultaneously. The Commission 
agrees with the comment that next generation 5G networks are expected 
to depend in part on higher frequencies, increased spectral efficiency 
and greater density of cell deployments and that these factors alone 
may be insufficient to meet the expected tenfold increases in peak data 
rates and user throughput without using ultra-wide channel bandwidths 
of at least 200 MHz. These wider channels available at higher 
frequencies could allow for higher data rates in environments 
constrained by power or signal-to-noise ratios. By facilitating higher 
throughput, wideband channels will thereby permit more users to 
simultaneously use the band.
    55. The Commission also modified the current band plan that is 
based on paired spectrum blocks in favor of larger, unpaired channels 
to enable Time Division Duplexing (TDD) which commenters believe will 
best enable a 5G mobile service environment. Straight Path asserts that 
TDD is preferable in these frequencies given the current lack of 
adequate frequency duplexers capable of meeting the performance, cost 
or form factor requirements necessary to facilitate Frequency Division 
Duplexing (FDD) at these higher wavelengths. TDD does not require a 
frequency duplexer and allows flexible downlink-uplink ratios that 
depend on traffic and result in efficient utilization of spectrum. 
While these and other commenters note the benefits of TDD in the 
context of 5G, commenters overwhelmingly support rules that allow for 
flexible duplexing schemes, and the rules the Commission adopted will 
allow any type of duplexing. Licensees may also continue to offer FDD 
service by acquiring and pairing multiple spectrum blocks. Because the 
existing channel plan favors FDD operation and limits flexibility to 
accommodate other duplexing schemes, reconfiguring the channel plan 
will remove obstacles to TDD schemes while still allowing for 
flexibility to accommodate FDD. Furthermore, larger bandwidths may 
optimize traffic management and improve system performance because a 
single, wide carrier permits centralized spectrum management whereas 
aggregation and use of various narrow bandwidth channels requires 
greater power consumption and equipment complexity. Finally, 200 
megahertz channels will potentially create several empty channels for 
new entrants after incumbent licensees swap or repack their existing 
systems into consecutive or adjacent channels. Given all of the 
considerations above, the Commission finds that 200 MHz channels are 
the best band size for 39 GHz.
6. Pre-Auction License Reconfiguration
    56. Straight Path's proposal contains the clearest delineation of 
rules and steps necessary to align adjacent spectrum tranches to create 
contiguous bands--the goal advocated by commenters. The Commission 
agrees with Straight Path that in EAs where only it holds licenses, the 
Commission should accept any exchange application in which Straight 
Path or others propose to acquire the same amount of spectrum in the 
market that it proposes to relinquish as long as it meets the end goal 
of creating a contiguous block or blocks of spectrum. In instances 
where there are multiple geographic area licensees, Straight Path 
advocates that the Commission should first accept any band plan 
mutually acceptable to the various licensees as long as it also 
increases the amount of contiguous spectrum for at least one of the 
licensees. If licensees do not agree on a band plan, Straight Path 
argues the Commission should accept applications in which an incumbent 
geographic area licensee seeks to acquire any contiguous spectrum 
blocks adjacent to spectrum blocks it already holds subject to two 
limitations (i) the target spectrum block is not already occupied by 
another incumbent geographic area licensee; and (ii) the target 
spectrum block could not be requested by another incumbent geographic 
area licensee on the grounds that it is adjacent to a block it holds or 
that it could hold. A licensee should be able to continue to add 
contiguous unused blocks in a row until it reaches a prohibited block--
i.e., a spectrum block that could also be claimed by another incumbent 
licensee. Straight Path suggests that in this way, contiguous occupied 
bands could be aligned starting at the lower edge of the band--at 38.6 
GHz--and moving up toward 40 GHz. Because the Commission adopted a band 
plan for the

[[Page 79904]]

37 GHz band that provides for continuity of commercial operations 
across the 37 GHz and 39 GHz bands, when the bands are viewed together, 
Straight Path's swapping plan results in occupied spectrum in the 
middle of the combined bands. One alternative might be to push 
incumbents to the upper end of the band near 39.5 GHz, in order to 
create larger available swathes of spectrum by combining the lower 
frequencies with the open bands in the 37 GHz band. However, in the 
interest of addressing mobile data demand as quickly as possible, 39 
GHz licensees at the bottom of the band will provide the first market 
for mmW mobile equipment as soon as it becomes available, and this will 
further the goal of interoperability by allowing fixed licensees to 
more rapidly foster the development of mobile in their bands.
    57. Some of the 200 MHz spectrum blocks offered at auction will 
also contain at least one incumbent RSA licensee occupying some portion 
of the spectrum. Straight Path argues that where the incumbent 
geographic license holder is also the RSA licensee, the RSA license 
will be deemed not to exist and will be cancelled upon an exchange. 
Otherwise, incumbent licensees will only be permitted to elect to add 
contiguous channels with greater encumbrances than vice versa; 
accordingly, a geographic area licensee can always opt to exchange a 
block without an RSA for an adjacent block with an RSA whose operations 
it will have to protect, and similarly it can always opt to take a 
license area with a more encumbered RSA over a block it holds with a 
less encumbered RSA, but it cannot ``upgrade'' to an RSA-free block or 
a license with an embedded RSA that is less encumbered. Overall, 
although Intel and Straight Path have argued that EAs are the 
appropriate geographic area for new licenses given their historical use 
and the complexity of the swap process, as discussed above, the 
Commission's preferred license area size for the 39 GHz band are PEAs, 
and such PEAs neatly fit into the EAs they comprise. Accordingly, once 
incumbents' spectrum swapping has run its course at the EA level, the 
resulting license area/band combinations should be further broken down 
into PEAs, which `nest' into EAs.
    58. The Commission believes this reconfiguration process will yield 
a band, and licenses, that are more useable by incumbents as well as 
new entrants for the new flexible use services, including mobile 
broadband that the Commission is authorizing in this Report and Order. 
Straight Path currently holds 931 licenses out of 1,098. If Straight 
Path voluntarily reconfigures its rights as it has advocated, this will 
substantially reduce encumbrances (i.e., remaining RSAs or blocks 
within EAs that have not been reconfigured) that might exist in new 
license areas before a future auction. While the Commission adopted a 
voluntary reconfiguration approach, it is its hope and expectation that 
all licensees will take advantage of this opportunity to convert their 
licenses to the new flexible use licensing scheme and band plan. 
Furthermore, while the Commission adopted a voluntary approach, the 
Commission notes that under Section 316 of the Act the Commission 
retains the right to modify any license consistent with the public 
interest.

C. 37 GHz Band (37-38.6 GHz)

    59. The 37 GHz band presents a number of opportunities because, 
other than a limited number of existing Federal uses that need 
protection, the band is a greenfield--there are no existing non-federal 
operations, terrestrial or mobile. In addition, it is adjacent to the 
39 GHz band, which presents an opportunity to create a larger, 
contiguous 37/39 GHz band, subject to similar technical and operational 
rules. Also, the Federal fixed and mobile service allocations are 
lightly used. The approach the Commission adopted takes full advantage 
of these opportunities.
    60. Specifically, the Commission can meet the twin goals of 
expanding commercial access in this band while facilitating continued 
and expanded Federal use. Because there are both Federal and non-
Federal fixed and mobile rights and there are minimal incumbency issues 
(or an installed base of equipment), the approach the Commission 
adopted in this band can significantly further the regulatory, policy, 
and technical approaches to Federal and non-Federal sharing. As 
discussed in greater detail below, the Commission adopted a band plan 
that allows for continuity of commercial operations between the 37 and 
39 GHz bands, the Commission protects a limited number of Federal 
military sites across the full 37 GHz band, and the Commission 
identifies 600 megahertz of spectrum that will be available for 
coordinated coequal shared access between Federal and non-Federal 
users. Through this structure, additional proposals in the Further 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM), and the collaborative industry/
government process that will take place to further define the sharing 
process and paradigm, the Commission will take substantial strides 
forward on Federal and non-Federal sharing in the mmW bands while also 
making a significant amount of spectrum available for wireless 
broadband.
1. Suitability for Mobile Use
    61. The Commission adopted rules to permit fixed and mobile 
terrestrial operation in the 37 GHz band to enable as wide a range of 
services as possible. The Commission finds that there are several 
important characteristics of the 37 GHz band that make the provision of 
fixed and mobile terrestrial operations especially promising: It 
contains 1.6 gigahertz of contiguous spectrum, which could support 
ultra-high data rates; it is contiguous with the 39 GHz band, which 
will permit operators to aggregate spectrum across both bands; and it 
has global co-primary fixed and mobile allocations, which could enable 
operators to achieve economies of scale. Cisco urges us to proceed 
cautiously, and Boeing urges the Commission to wait until the studies 
called for by the WRC-15 are completed, the Commission is persuaded 
that fixed and mobile terrestrial services can be provided in the 37 
GHz band. In this regard, in analyzing the suitability of the 37 GHz 
band for mobile service, the band is very similar to the 39 GHz band. 
It has an existing mobile allocation, the propagation characteristics 
are very similar to the 39 GHz band, and the Commission does not see 
any inconsistency with other allocations that would make the band 
unsuitable for mobile service. In terms of timing of the Commission's 
action, considering the potential benefit for 5G services and the 
significant lead time that will be necessary to develop the services in 
this band, the Commission believes that the Commission should move 
forward and develop fixed and mobile terrestrial services rules for the 
37 GHz band. Moreover, as discussed more fully below, the rules the 
Commission adopted accommodate the needs of National Aeronautics and 
Space Administration (NASA), National Science Foundation (NSF), the 
military, and FSS operations in the 37 GHz band as well as Earth 
Exploration Satellite Service (EESS) (passive) and Space Research 
Service (SRS) (passive) operations in the adjacent 36-37 GHz band.
2. Licensing the 37 GHz Band
    62. The Commission adopted a licensing approach that makes five 200 
megahertz blocks available on a geographic area-licensed basis in the 
37.6-38.6 GHz portion of the band (upper band segment). The Commission

[[Page 79905]]

will make the 37-37.6 GHz block (lower band segment) available for 
coordinated co-primary sharing between Federal and non-Federal users, 
where non-Federal rights are granted by rule. The Commission notes that 
the entire band is subject to Federal co-primary fixed and mobile 
allocations. The Commission declines to adopt the hybrid authorization 
licensing scheme because it is unsupported by the record. Specifically, 
commenters oppose it because they do not believe that the 37 GHz band 
is appropriate for this particular scheme, though it could be used for 
other bands. In addition, the satellite industry expresses concern that 
the hybrid licensing approach does not provide satellite operators with 
any meaningful certainty that they will be able to expand into the 37 
GHz band.
    63. Of the three licensing options that the Commission sought 
comment on in the NPRM, the Commission finds that a variation of the 
Commission's alternative proposal best enables the band to be used for 
new commercial uses while simultaneously allowing fixed and mobile 
Federal use to expand. Although there is support in the record to 
license the entire 37 GHz band by geographic area, the Commission finds 
that it is in the public interest to license a portion of this band on 
a non-exclusive shared basis, and to license the remainder of the band 
by geographic area to give potential licensees additional opportunity 
to access large blocks of spectrum or to use 37 GHz spectrum in 
combination with, and similarly to, 39 GHz spectrum. Allowing part of 
the band to be made available on a non-exclusive, shared basis will 
promote access to spectrum by a wide variety of entities, support 
innovative uses of the band, and help ensure that spectrum is widely 
utilized. Adopting geographic area licensing for the other portion of 
the band will expeditiously make spectrum available and allow common 
development of the 37 GHz and 39 GHz bands. Furthermore, users in the 
shared portion of the band will benefit from efforts by equipment 
manufacturers and licensees to develop equipment for the portion of the 
band licensed on a geographic area basis. Thus, the Commission finds 
that adopting the alternative proposal, as modified below, should 
promote investment and deployment in both bands. As explained below, 
the Commission agrees that there are benefits to adopting the same 
geographic area licensing framework for the 37 GHz and 39 GHz spectrum 
bands. Also, the Commission finds that adopting the alternative 
proposal, in addition to other decisions made by the Commission, 
provides satellite operators the certainty they need to be able to 
expand their operations into the 37 GHz band in the future.
    64. The Commission adopted a modified version of the alternative 
proposal as follows: The Commission will create a band plan with a 600 
megahertz shared block in 37-37.6 GHz and a geographically-licensed 
portion in 37.6-38.6 GHz. The lower band segment will be fully 
available for use by both Federal and non-Federal users on a 
coordinated co-equal basis. Non-Federal users, which the Commission 
will identify as Shared Access License (SAL), will be authorized by 
rule. Federal and non-Federal users will access the band through a 
coordination mechanism, including exploration of potential dynamic 
sharing through technology in the lower 600 megahertz, which the 
Commission will more fully develop through the FNPRM and through 
government/industry collaboration. The Commission envisions this 
segment serving as a proving ground for Federal and non-Federal sharing 
in the mmW bands, as a way to facilitate expanded Federal use in the 
band, an opportunity to facilitate lower-cost access to mmW bands, and 
a means for all providers to gain additional capacity where and when it 
is needed.
    65. As described below, the Commission adopted the same technical 
rules for the shared band segment as the Commission does for the rest 
of the 37 GHz band. These technical rules are also consistent with the 
39 GHz band. The Commission also adopted an operability requirement 
that will ensure equipment developed for the 37 and 39 GHz bands is 
able to operate across the entire 37-40 GHz band. This will help drive 
scale in the development and access to the equipment, and allow users 
in the shared portion of the band, including Federal users, to benefit. 
In order to ensure a sharing environment in 37-37.6 GHz that is 
predictable, manageable, and efficient, the Commission strongly 
encourages Federal users to comply with the same technical rules, and 
will work with National Telecommunications and Information 
Administration (NTIA) to explore establishment of guidance in its 
regulations.
    66. Following the adoption of this Report and Order, the WTB and 
OET will, in collaboration with NTIA and Federal stakeholders, work 
with industry stakeholders and other interested parties to further 
define the sharing framework. The Commission will hold one or more 
public meetings to examine the state of innovative sharing techniques 
and technologies and to have an open dialogue about how sharing can 
best be implemented and achieved in the 37-37.6 GHz band. The 
Commission strongly encourages both industry and Federal stakeholders 
to use new and existing experimental testbeds to develop sharing 
approaches and technologies. Based on stakeholder feedback, the WTB and 
OET may, jointly with NTIA, issue a public notice seeking comment on a 
refined and detailed 37 GHz sharing framework. In response to the 
record developed, the Commission, jointly with NTIA, will establish the 
37 GHz sharing mechanism. The Commission believes this inclusive and 
collaborative process ensures that all parties' needs are met and that 
an effective and robust sharing mechanism will be developed.
    67. In the upper band segment (37.6-38.6 GHz), the Commission will 
use geographic area licensing with PEAs as the licensing unit, which is 
consistent with the licenses in the 39 GHz band. In this band, there 
will be Federal co-primary use coordination zones around 14 military 
sites where the military will have the right to operate fixed and 
mobile operations, and the three SRS sites as described below. Non-
Federal users will be able to access these locations through a 
coordination mechanism that will be developed and established by WTB 
and OET in conjunction with NTIA and announced via Public Notice. The 
Commission also recognizes that there are existing Federal and non-
Federal fixed and mobile allocations in the upper band segment, and in 
the FNPRM, the Commission seeks comment on developing additional 
criteria under which Federal users can obtain access to the upper band 
segment.
    68. The Commission believes licensing the 37 GHz band in this 
manner has many benefits. In the lower band segment, the Commission is 
creating an innovative shared space that can be used by a wide variety 
of Federal and non-Federal users. SALs will be widely available to 
provide easy access to spectrum, including for new innovative uses and 
for targeted access where and when providers need additional capacity. 
It will help further efforts to facilitate sharing between Federal and 
non-Federal users, and will give Federal users and consumers an 
opportunity to take advantage of speed-to-market and lower cost of 
broadly deployed commercial technologies, and provide Federal users 
opportunities for current use and future growth. In the upper band 
segment, the Commission notes that the 37 GHz band and the 39

[[Page 79906]]

GHz band will be licensed under the same framework, with identical 
technical and licensing rules. They will both be licensed by PEAs, 
which will allow licensees in the 37 GHz and 39 GHz bands to aggregate 
blocks of spectrum or to pair blocks of spectrum.
    69. Below, the Commission discusses in further detail some of the 
decisions the Commission has made concerning the 37 GHz band. In the 
FNPRM, the Commission seeks comment on refining the sharing framework 
the Commission adopted.
3. License Area Size
    70. The Commission is presented with a unique opportunity to adopt 
a licensing scheme that will apply to 2,400 megahertz of contiguous 
spectrum, the upper segment from 37.6-38.6 GHz together with the 38.6-
40 GHz band. In the shared band segment, the Commission will authorize 
fixed and mobile users on a site-based coordinated basis. The 
Commission believes this approach will allow users to access spectrum 
where and when it is needed, which will help maximize spectrum by 
providing opportunities for each user to target just the areas it 
needs. The Commission is licensing the 39 GHz band by PEA. The 
Commission's reasons for adopting PEAs as the geographic area for the 
39 GHz band apply here as well. Specifically, as the Commission noted 
with respect to the 39 GHz band, after reviewing the record, the 
Commission now believes that PEAs strike the appropriate balance 
between facilitating access to spectrum by both large and small 
providers and simplifying frequency coordination while incentivizing 
investment in, and rapid deployment of, new technologies. Thus, the 
Commission adopts the same geographic license structure for both the 
upper band segment of the 37 GHz band and the 39 GHz band. This 
decision will give licensees the flexibility that they need and will 
encourage investment in a wide variety of services and technologies.
4. Band Plan for Upper Band Segment
    71. The Commission will divide the upper band segment into five 
blocks of 200 megahertz each for non-Federal users. As explained in 
this Report and Order, the Commission is attempting to create a 
consistent and coherent licensing framework that can be applied 
throughout the mmW bands, with modifications based on the 
characteristics of a particular band. The Commission's decision to 
choose 200 megahertz channels rather than 533 megahertz channels also 
stems, in part, from the Commission's previous decision to create two 
licensing segments for the 37 GHz band: A 600 megahertz lower band 
segment licensed by rule, and a 1,000 megahertz upper segment, which 
will be licensed geographically by PEA. Adopting 200 megahertz channel 
sizes for the upper band segment is consistent with the 200 megahertz 
channels the Commission adopted for the 39 GHz band. Because the 
Commission licenses the upper band segment of the 37 GHz band and the 
39 GHz band by PEA, licensees will have the flexibility to pair their 
37 GHz license with a 39 GHz license.
    72. In addition, the provision of fixed and mobile terrestrial 
operations at this frequency will depend upon large blocks of spectrum 
and a single 200 megahertz block provides a sufficient amount of 
spectrum for the provision of high-capacity wireless broadband. Those 
licensees needing more spectrum than a 200 megahertz channel can 
combine channels to create contiguous blocks of 200 megahertz channels, 
either within the 37 GHz band or by combining 37 GHz spectrum with 39 
GHz spectrum. Licensees also have the option of acquiring 425 megahertz 
channels in the 28 GHz band.

D. 64-71 GHz Band

    73. The Commission is making available the 64-71 GHz frequency band 
for use by unlicensed devices pursuant to the same technical standards 
as in the 57-64 GHz frequency band under Sec.  15.255 of the 
Commission's rules, with slight modifications. As the Commission has 
consistently stated, it is optimal to include a balance of licensed 
rights and opportunities to operate on an unlicensed basis in order to 
meet the country's wireless broadband needs. The Commission's action 
here creates a 14-gigahertz segment of contiguous spectrum in these 
frequency bands to encourage the development of new and innovative 
unlicensed applications, and promote next-generation high-speed 
wireless links with higher connectivity and throughput, while 
alleviating spectrum congestion from carrier networks by enabling 
mobile data off-loading through Wi-Fi and other unlicensed connections.
    74. The Commission is adopting rules to allow for unlicensed 
operations in the 64-71 GHz band, subject to the technical standards in 
Sec.  15.255, thus creating a contiguous spectrum segment with the 57-
64 GHz band. The Commission observes that unlicensed WiGig devices 
using the 57-64 GHz band are just beginning to be marketed and these 
products are standardized pursuant to an internationally harmonized 
channelization scheme, which should promote their growth and usage. 
Making available additional spectrum contiguous to the existing 57-64 
GHz band may enable higher throughputs and enhanced use of present 
spectrum, as well as to permit an increase in the number of 
simultaneous high-bandwidth users. The Commission agrees with Intel 
that a lesser amount of spectrum would limit the growth potential of 60 
GHz applications. The Commission also agrees with the WISPA that 
``because ITU may study a band is an insufficient reason for the 
Commission to delay making a valuable spectrum resource available for 
unlicensed use.'' The Commission acknowledges that eventual 
harmonization with international requirements will benefit consumers by 
promoting a global marketplace and enhancing the international 
competitiveness of U.S. manufacturers. However, notwithstanding a 
desire for harmonization with international standards, the Commission 
determines to make these frequencies available for unlicensed use based 
on the Commission's analysis of U.S.-specific factors. Here, the 
Commission determines that the Commission should not wait for the 
outcome of the ITU study of this band, contrary to what T-Mobile 
advocates, because that could take years, leaving 5 gigahertz of 
spectrum to lie fallow in the meantime, when unlicensed applications 
are ready in the very near future to make use of this spectrum, given 
current planned deployments of WiGig products in the adjacent 57-64 GHz 
band.\5\ In addition, note that spectrum characteristics vary at 
different frequencies, due to different propagation losses and other 
atmospheric and sharing conditions, thus a strict linear comparison per 
frequency unit of the Commission amounts in different frequency bands 
as ``gigahertz parity'' (e.g., 3.85 gigahertz of spectrum in lower 
bands vs. 14 gigahertz of spectrum in upper bands) is not a valid 
comparison. Based on the above, the Commission is permitting use of the 
57-71 GHz band by unlicensed devices pursuant to the technical rules in 
Sec.  15.255.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Commission also notes that the ``study'' of a frequency 
band by the ITU does not mean necessarily that the band will be 
automatically designated for licensed use, because licensing of 
spectrum is deferred to ``the sovereign right of each State to 
regulate its telecommunication''. See International 
Telecommunication Union, Constitution and Convention (http://www.itu.int/en/history/Pages/ConstitutionAndConvention.aspx).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    75. With respect to the additional requests from Microsoft et al to 
extend

[[Page 79907]]

the band up to 72.5 GHz, and to allow indoor use of the 72.5-76 GHz 
band by unlicensed devices, the Commission does not find that 
additional spectrum above and beyond the very large 14-gigahertz of 
contiguous spectrum in the 57-71 GHz band that the Commission is 
providing for unlicensed operations herein is warranted at this time, 
due to the presence of the numerous existing fixed links in the 71-76/
81-86 GHz bands. When the Commission adopted rules for licensed 
operations in these bands in 2003, it did not permit unlicensed sharing 
of these bands because ``an underlay of unlicensed devices in the bands 
could detrimentally affect the quality and buildout of service.'' In 
addition, the fixed point-to-point equipment that has been developed 
for deployment in the 71-76 GHz and 81-86 GHz bands were not engineered 
to operate in a part 15 unlicensed environment. Subsequently, in 2014, 
the Commission adopted part 15 rules to permit a special type of 
unlicensed device, level probing radars (LPR), to share the 75-85 GHz 
band; these devices, however, must be operated in a vertically downward 
position at fixed locations with severe limitations on antenna 
beamwidth. In contrast, the 5G unlicensed transmitters envisioned here 
would be both mobile and fixed and would not have such limitations. The 
Commission finds that parties requesting to extend the band beyond 71 
GHz for unlicensed operation did not submit any persuasive technical 
arguments to prove that unlicensed sharing with the 71-76/81-86 GHz 
licensed services is feasible at this time. Accordingly, the Commission 
denies these requests at this time.

E. Federal Sharing Issues

    76. Many bands above 24 GHz have Federal allocations on a primary 
basis. As the Commission continues to increase flexibility in the non-
Federal use of these bands, the Commission must consider appropriate 
mechanisms and tools to share these bands that recognize the co-primary 
rights in these bands. In this Report and Order, the Commission 
facilitates sharing in the 39.5-40 GHz band and 37-38.6 GHz band, 
including through new sharing schemes that promote dynamic and flexible 
access in the 37-37.6 GHz band. In order to continue to evolve spectrum 
access and sharing regimes that meet both Federal and non-Federal 
needs, it will be imperative for all stakeholders, including wireless 
and satellite industries, to engage proactively to help shape these 
solutions.
1. 39.5-40 GHz
    77. The 39.5-40 GHz portion of the 39 GHz band is allocated to the 
Federal FSS and MSS a primary basis, limited to space-to-Earth 
(downlink) operations. However, Federal MSS earth stations in this band 
may not claim protection from non-Federal fixed and mobile stations in 
this band.
    78. In the NPRM, the Commission explained that when the 39 GHz 
Report and Order was adopted, Federal use of the band was limited to 
military systems in the 39.5-40 GHz band segment, that the Department 
of Defense (DoD) stated that it had plans to implement satellite 
downlinks at 39.5-40 GHz in the future, and that the NASA identified 
39.5-40 GHz as a possible space research band to accommodate future 
Earth-to-space wideband data requirements. The 39 GHz Report and Order 
expressed optimism that such plans would not affect the continued 
development of the 39 GHz band for non-Federal use, but the Commission 
said that it intended to address those interference issues in a future, 
separate proceeding that would focus on developing inter-licensee and 
inter-service standards and criteria. At present, the U.S. Table of 
Frequency Allocations provides that Federal satellite services in the 
39.5-40 GHz band are limited to military systems.
    79. Although only four commenters responded to the Commission's 
questions on these issues, all four agreed that it is possible for 
Federal and non-Federal operations to share the 39 GHz band. They also 
agreed that the Commission should adopt coordination zones to mitigate 
interference between Federal and non-Federal operations. For instance, 
AT&T argues that the Commission should adopt coordination zones rather 
than novel spectrum sharing techniques because coordination zones 
balance the twin goals of efficient spectrum utilization and the 
prevention of harmful interference to incumbents. Intel argues that 
portions of the band that are strictly Federal use could be separated 
from those for commercial use. Cisco states that while coordination 
will have to be done by the Commission staff and their counterparts at 
NTIA, co-existence is achievable. Finally, Nokia argues that the 
Commission should continue work with NTIA and other Federal agencies to 
minimize Federal coordination zones, which would maximize the value of 
the spectrum.
    80. In 2016, NTIA sent a letter to the Commission addressing issues 
raised in the NPRM, regarding, in part, military operations in the 
39.5-40 GHz portion of the 38.6-40 GHz band. NTIA explained that the 
39.5-40 GHz band is allocated to military MSS and FSS earth stations. 
Federal MSS earth stations cannot claim protection from non-Federal 
fixed and mobile stations as specified in footnote US382 of the table 
of frequency allocations. However, Federal earth stations in the MSS 
are not required to protect non-Federal fixed and mobile services. NTIA 
stated that given the existing regulatory constraints in the 39.5-40 
GHz band, the NPRM's proposed non-Federal fixed and mobile operations 
will not impact Federal satellite operations in the 39.5-40 GHz band.
    81. The Commission concludes that it is possible for Federal 
operations to share the band with non-Federal fixed and mobile 
terrestrial operations because the protections offered by footnote 
US382 are sufficient to protect both Federal and non-Federal operations 
in this band. Thus, no changes to the Commission's rules are necessary.
2. 37-38.6 GHz
    82. The Commission concludes that non-Federal fixed and mobile 
operations can share the 37-38 GHz band with SRS downlink operations 
under certain conditions. First, as a result of discussions between 
NTIA and the Commission, NTIA indicated that it would request 
protection for only three SRS earth station sites: Goldstone, 
California; White Sands, New Mexico; and Socorro, New Mexico. Second, 
to address NTIA's recommendations, the Commission will establish 
coordination zones for these three sites by adding a footnote to the US 
Table of Allocations listing the locations to be protected and their 
respective coordination zones. Third, with respect to operations, at 
Green Bank, West Virginia, NTIA indicated that since Green Bank, West 
Virginia is located in an existing quiet zone, any new or modified 
stations including in the fixed and mobile services, within the zone 
are required by Sec.  1.924(a) of the Commission's rules to notify the 
National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO), and thus Green Bank would 
not be included in the footnote. Therefore, the Commission adopted 
footnote US151, which requires that, in the 37-38 GHz band, fixed and 
mobile stations not cause harmful interference to Federal SRS earth 
station at three sites and that non-Federal applications for such use 
be coordinated with NTIA in accordance with new Sec.  30.205 of the 
Commission's rules.
    83. The Commission concludes that non-Federal fixed and mobile 
operations can share the 37-38.6 GHz band with DoD operations. With 
regard

[[Page 79908]]

to Federal co-primary access to the 37 GHz band, the Commission will 
adopt rules that entail the coordination zones recommended by NTIA for 
the 14 military sites, and the ability for Federal agencies to add 
future sites on a coordinated basis. The Commission will make the 37-
37.6 GHz block (lower band segment) available for coordinated co-
primary sharing between Federal and non-Federal users, where non-
Federal rights are granted by rule. This framework will facilitate 
access by DoD and other Federal users. In the FNPRM, the Commission 
seeks comment on defining the sharing framework in greater detail. In 
the upper band segment, the Commission seeks comment on facilitating 
Federal coordination with licensees for access to licensed areas.
    84. The Commission also does not believe that it is necessary to 
take action to protect the weather satellites, which according to 
Committee on Radio Frequency (CORF), will operate above 37 GHz until at 
least 2020 because it will take a significant amount of time for mmW 
devices to be developed and deployed in the 37 GHz band. Therefore, the 
Commission expects that relatively few mmW devices will be operating in 
the band while the weather satellites are still in use.
    85. Under the plan the Commission adopted, the Commission enables 
the deployment of new commercial services while protecting Federal 
agency missions. This balances the needs of commercial operators with 
the needs of Federal agencies for protection and future growth by 
creating an environment where Federal and non-Federal users can share 
the band on a co-primary basis and providing enough certainty to future 
commercial users to stimulate investment in the spectrum.
3. Passive Services Below 37 GHz
    86. The Commission believes that the out-of-band emission (OOBE) 
limit that the Commission adopts in this Report and Order will provide 
adequate protection to the passive sensors in the adjacent 36-37 GHz 
band. The OOBE limit will keep emissions from an UMFUS device into the 
36-37 GHz band well below the -10 dBW level specified by footnote 
US550A. The Commission notes that the -10dBW power limit was adopted to 
protect passive sensors in the 36-37 GHz band in accordance with ITU 
Resolution 752 (WRC-07). Because this limit was adopted by the ITU to 
protect passive sensors from harmful interference from fixed and mobile 
transmitters in the 36-37 GHz band, the Commission concludes that it 
will provide appropriate protection to the passive sensors from 
transmitters in the adjacent band.
    87. The Commission will not adopt a guard band at 37 GHz to protect 
the EESS and SRS in the 36-37 GHz band as suggested by CORF and IEEE 
Frequency Allocations in Remote Sensing (FARS). Neither CORF nor IEEE 
FARS make a specific recommendation on the necessary size of the guard 
band, although CORF requests a guard band of at least 100 MHz. Because 
a guard band will reduce the spectrum available for mmW devices, the 
Commission does not want to take this step without compelling evidence 
that it is necessary. No one has provided information on the specific 
benefits and necessity of adopting a guard band of at least 100 MHz to 
protect EESS and SRS. Given the lack of data supporting adoption of a 
guard band, the Commission believes that the out-of-band emission limit 
that the Commission has adopted will provide adequate protection to the 
EESS and SRS without the need for a guard band at 37 GHz.
    88. With regard to protecting radio astronomy at the three 
locations specified by CORF, the Commission is not convinced that 
additional measures are needed to protect radio astronomy. The radio 
astronomy observations that CORF is concerned about will be conducted 
in the 36.43-36.5 GHz band, which is 500 megahertz from the 37 GHz 
band, so the emission limits that the Commission is adopting for mmW 
devices should sufficiently protect radio astronomy.

F. Licensing, Operating, and Regulatory Issues

1. Creation of New Rule Service and Part
    89. The Commission adopted in its proposal to create a new service, 
the UMFUS under a new part 30 of the Commission's rules to include the 
28 GHz, 39 GHz, and 37 GHz bands. Licensing the millimeter wave bands 
under part 27, as CTIA suggests, would produce a less flexible regime 
than the Commission intend while the rules the Commission adopted in 
part 30 will provide much of the flexibility present in the part 27 
rules. Part 27 would be a poor fit for the point-to-point services 
currently operating in the 28 and 39 GHz bands, and for the backhaul 
uses other licensees may wish to include in their services. Part 96, 
which Google suggests, is designed for a specific regime of intensive, 
three-tier sharing. As the Commission is not adopting this type of 
sharing regime for these bands at this time, using this rule part would 
be inappropriate. The Commission concludes that establishing a new rule 
part will allow us to have one unified set of rules governing the 
various types of operations the Commission contemplates licensees will 
offer, which will provide more clarity to licensees and more accurately 
reflect the nature of these licenses.
2. Regulatory Status
    90. The Commission adopted in its proposal from the NPRM to 
implement a flexible regulatory framework for the UMFUS. As the 
Commission proposed, UMFUS licensees in the 28, 39, and 37 GHz bands 
will be able to choose the regulatory status (common carrier, non-
common carrier, or both) that best fits their business models and the 
services they seek to provide. This approach will maintain an open and 
flexible framework that will allow the business judgments of individual 
applicants and licensees in these bands to shape the nature of the 
services offered pursuant to their licenses.
    91. The Commission also adopts its proposal to rely on the 
applicant's designation of its common carrier or non-common carrier 
status, to enable us to fulfill our obligations to enforce the common 
carrier requirements contained in statutes and the Commission's 
regulations. An election to provide service on a common carrier basis 
requires that the elements of common carriage be present, and the 
applicant is in the best position to ascertain the presence of these 
elements. This approach is consistent with the Commission's past 
decisions regarding the classification of mobile services.
3. Foreign Ownership Reporting
    92. Certain foreign ownership and citizenship requirements are 
imposed by subsections (a) and (b) of Section 310 of the Act, as 
modified by the 1996 Act. These provisions prohibit the issuance of 
licenses to certain applicants. For current LMDS, 37 GHz, and 39 GHz 
licensees, these statutory provisions are adopted in part 101 of the 
Commission's rules at Sec.  101.7 of the Commission's rules. 
Specifically, Sec.  101.7(a) prohibits the granting of any license to 
be held by a foreign government or its representative. Section 101.7(b) 
prohibits the granting of any common carrier license to be held by 
individuals that fail any of the four citizenship requirements listed.
    93. In the NPRM, the Commission tentatively concluded that the 
Section 310 requirements would apply to any applicants in the UMFUS. 
Based on this interpretation of the requirements of Section 310, the 
Commission proposed

[[Page 79909]]

in the NPRM to include a provision in the new part 30 that would mirror 
the current Sec.  101.7 of the Commission's rules. In addition, the 
Commission proposed that all applicants for part 30 licenses be 
required to report the same foreign ownership information, regardless 
of the specific type of service they sought to provide. An applicant 
requesting authorization for broadcast, common carrier, aeronautical en 
route, or aeronautical Fixed Services, alone or in combination with 
other services, would be prohibited from holding a license if it met 
any of the criteria in Section 310(b). If the applicant requested 
authorization for services other than for broadcast, common carrier, 
aeronautical en route, or aeronautical Fixed Services, it could hold a 
license if it met the single alien ownership requirement in Section 
310(a), regardless of whether it would otherwise be disqualified for a 
common carrier authorization. No commenters addressed the issue of 
foreign ownership reporting requirements, or opposed the Commission's 
proposals.
    94. The Commission adopted in its proposals from the NPRM to 
require the same foreign ownership reporting from all applicants for 
part 30 licenses, regardless of the specific type of service they seek 
to provide, and to implement this requirement by including a provision 
in part 30 that mirrors Sec.  101.7 of the Commission's current rules. 
This approach will properly implement the restrictions contained in 
Sections 310(a) and (b) of the Act, and is consistent with the 
Commission's treatment of flexible use services regulated under part 27 
of the Commission's rules.
4. Eligibility
    95. In the NPRM, the Commission adopted an open eligibility 
standard for the UMFUS. The Commission noted that an open eligibility 
approach would not affect citizenship, character, or other generally 
applicable qualifications that may apply under the Commission's rules. 
Cisco and CTA support this proposal, citing uncertainty as to how the 
UMFUS bands will develop, and the need to allow innovation from all 
parties. No commenters opposed the Commission's proposal.
    96. The Commission adopted its proposal to implement an open 
eligibility standard for the UMFUS. This approach is in keeping with 
the flexibility of the other licensing rules the Commission adopted in 
this Report and Order, as well as the Commission's treatment of other 
flexible use services, and will encourage innovation and efficient use 
of spectrum in these bands.
5. License Term
    97. The Commission adopted its proposal to establish a 10-year 
license term for all UMFUS licenses, and the Commission's proposal to 
award a renewal expectancy for subsequent license terms if the licensee 
continues to provide at least the initially-required level of service. 
While the Commission has pursued shorter license terms and non-
renewable licenses in other bands, and continue to believe there are 
circumstances where those structures are appropriate, here the 
Commission adopted a 10 year license term that can be renewed. The 
Commission believes a 10-year license term will give licensees 
sufficient certainty to invest in their systems, particularly as the 
new technology is still nascent and will require time to fully develop. 
If the standards for mobile service in the mmW bands are established 
by, at the latest, 2020, new licensees would still have the majority of 
the license term after that point to plan and to deploy service. 
Neither XO nor any other commenter has presented facts that would 
justify a longer license term. A 10-year license term is also 
consistent with existing license terms in a wide variety of services.
    98. The Commission also adopted in its proposal to award a renewal 
expectancy for subsequent license terms if the licensee continues to 
provide at least the initially-required level of service through the 
end of any subsequent license terms. That treatment is consistent with 
the Commission's treatment of many other licensed services and will 
provide incentives for licensees to continue to provide service.
6. Mobile Spectrum Holdings Policies
    99. The Commission found it essential to establish clear and 
transparent mobile spectrum holdings policies that will promote 
competition in the future, including competition in the development of 
5G services, as well as promote the efficient use of mmW spectrum, and 
avoid an excessive concentration of licenses. As mentioned in the NPRM, 
demand for mobile service that mmW spectrum is expected to enhance and 
improve has been increasing, and the Commission's predictive judgment 
is that interest in the spectrum will be high. Thus, the Commission 
finds that it would provide regulatory certainty, flexibility in 
planning, and expedited deployment if the Commission supplies guidance 
on application of these policies at this stage when the Commission 
authorizes mobile service in these bands and adopt related rules 
governing the terms of service, rather than at some later stage. In the 
Commission's consideration of whether to adopt a mobile spectrum 
holdings limit for the licensing spectrum through competitive bidding 
and, if so, what type of limit to apply, the Commission's evaluation 
includes, among other things, the promotion of competition in relevant 
markets, the acceleration of private sector deployment of advanced 
services, and generally managing the spectrum in the public interest. 
The Commission evaluates how a limit would likely affect the quality of 
communications services or result in the provision of new or additional 
services to consumers, as well as any other statutory goals and 
directives applicable to a particular spectrum band being licensed by 
competitive bidding.
    100. As the Commission noted in the Mobile Spectrum Holdings Report 
and Order, the mobile wireless marketplace is highly concentrated, and 
with continually increasing consumer demand for mobile broadband, ``in 
order for there to be robust competition, multiple competing service 
providers must have access to or hold sufficient spectrum to be able to 
enter a marketplace or expand output rapidly in response to any price 
increase or reduction in quality, or other change that would harm 
consumer welfare.'' In addition, the Commission has found that holding 
a mix of spectrum bands is advantageous to providers and that 
consumers' benefit when multiple providers have access to a mix of 
spectrum bands. The Commission concludes here that with, the rapid rate 
of technological advance, mmW spectrum is likely to be a critical 
component in the development of 5G, and the Commission must take steps 
to ensure its optimal use to the benefit of all American consumers. For 
these reasons, the Commission adopted an ex ante spectrum aggregation 
limit of 1250 megahertz that will apply to licensees acquiring spectrum 
in the 28 GHz, 37 GHz, and/or 39 GHz bands, through competitive bidding 
in auction. The Commission adopted for these same reasons a spectrum 
threshold of 1250 megahertz for proposed secondary market transactions 
in these three bands.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Commission notes that this 1250 megahertz spectrum 
threshold helps to identify those markets that provide particular 
reason for further competitive analysis, but that the Commission's 
consideration of potential competitive harms would not be limited 
solely to those markets identified by the threshold.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    101. Historically, mmW frequencies have been considered unsuitable 
for

[[Page 79910]]

mobile applications because of propagation losses at such high 
frequencies and the inability of mmW signals to propagate around 
obstacles. As noted in the NPRM, bands above 24 GHz were not typically 
considered for stand-alone mobile services but rather as supplementary 
channels to deliver ultra-high speed data in specific places. Due to 
technological advances, the mmW bands could potentially be used for 
mobile broadband and are likely to serve as an important supplement to 
lower-band spectrum. Specifically, the mmW bands potentially will be 
used for supporting very high capacity networks in areas that require 
such capacity, as well as for machine-to-machine communications, and in 
the development of various Internet of Things (IoT) applications 
including wearables, fitness and healthcare devices, autonomous driving 
cars, and home and office automation.
    102. The Commission finds that grouping the 28 GHz, 37 GHz, and 39 
GHz bands together for purposes of applying these spectrum holdings 
policies, either at auction or in the secondary market, is appropriate 
in view of the interchangeability of the spectrum in these bands, i.e., 
similar technical characteristics and potential uses of this spectrum 
that are unique to the mmW bands. While certain differences across the 
mmW bands exist, the Commission finds these technical differences are 
not sufficient to significantly affect how these spectrum bands might 
be used and to require separate band-specific limits. This approach 
mirrors the Commission's existing Commercial Mobile Radio Service 
(CMRS) spectrum screen, which applies across a number of bands that do 
not have the same technical characteristics and not on a band-specific 
basis. Even assuming that more 37 GHz to 39 GHz spectrum would be 
needed to provide the same performance, there will be 2400 megahertz of 
37 GHz and 39 GHz spectrum available for service providers' use, almost 
three times as much as in the 28 GHz band. And, in any event, all the 
particular facts of any proposed secondary market transaction will be 
carefully evaluated on a case-by-case basis to ensure that the public 
interest is served. For these reasons, the Commission does not find 
that adopting a band-specific spectrum aggregation limit is necessary, 
and the Commission finds that the spectrum holdings policies adopted in 
the Report and Order will best support its objective of ensuring that 
multiple providers have access to this high band spectrum that is 
likely to be critically important in the development of 5G services 
moving forward. The Commission anticipates that applying these spectrum 
holdings policies to spectrum with similar technical characteristics 
that may become available in the future is also likely to be 
appropriate.
    103. Competitive Bidding. The Commission concludes that an approach 
based on limiting an entity's holding to approximately one-third of the 
relevant spectrum will help to ensure that multiple providers are able 
to access a sufficient amount of spectrum to the benefit of consumers. 
In the Commission's consideration of the appropriate limit to set at 
auction, the Commission notes that as a result of the various license 
sizes in these bands, setting a limit at approximately one-third would 
as a practical matter result in a limit notably lower than a one-third 
limit.\7\ Given the varied license sizes of spectrum blocks in each 
band, as well as the total amount of mmW spectrum available, the 
Commission finds that permitting licensees to acquire somewhat more 
than one-third of the spectrum available in these bands at auction is 
appropriate. The Commission therefore will not permit licensees to 
acquire more than 1250 megahertz across the three bands at auction.\8\ 
The Commission finds that the spectrum aggregation limit the Commission 
adopted will help ensure that multiple providers will be able to access 
a sufficient amount of mmW spectrum to facilitate the deployment of new 
services and innovation that will benefit consumers, while guarding 
against the excessive concentration of licenses. The Commission asks 
for comment below on how this limit might be implemented.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The total available amount of the mmW spectrum in the 28 
GHz, 37 GHz, and 39 GHz bands today is equal to 3250 megahertz, 
approximately one-third of which is 1100 megahertz. Given the sizes 
of the spectrum blocks in these bands, however, no entity could hold 
more than 1050 megahertz, and an entity interested in holding only 
licenses in the 37 and 39 MHz bands could hold no more than 1000 
megahertz. More specifically, the latter entity would be able to 
hold no more than five licenses of 200 megahertz each across the 37 
GHz and 39 GHz bands for a total of 1000 megahertz. An entity 
interested in holding some 28 GHz spectrum could hold either two 28 
GHz licenses and one license of 200 megahertz for a total of 1050 
megahertz, or one 425 megahertz license in the 28 GHz band and three 
licenses of 200 megahertz for a total of 1025 megahertz.
    \8\ The Commission recognizes that there are incumbent licensees 
in the 28 GHz and 39 GHz bands that currently hold varying amounts 
of spectrum. These licensees would be able to bid in the auction to 
an amount that would be no more than 1250 megahertz in total, taking 
existing spectrum holdings into account. Service providers' existing 
spectrum holdings across the 28 GHz, 37 GHz, and 39 GHz bands 
therefore will be counted for purposes of the Commission's 
application of the 1250 megahertz limit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    104. Secondary Market. The Commission adopted its proposal to 
exclude mmW spectrum from the current spectrum screen that includes 
those spectrum bands that the Commission has determined are suitable 
and available for the provision of mobile telephony/broadband services. 
As the Commission has previously explained, spectrum is considered 
``available'' if it is ``fairly certain that it will meet the criteria 
for suitable spectrum in the near term, an assessment that can be made 
at the time the spectrum is licensed or at later times after changes in 
technology or regulation that affect the consideration.'' The 
Commission does not find that the mmW bands are suitable and available 
for the provision of mobile telephony/broadband services in the same 
manner as other spectrum bands that are currently included in the 
Commission's spectrum screen as applied to secondary market 
transactions. The Commission makes this finding based on the unique 
characteristics of these bands as described above. Accordingly, the 
Commission does not include the mmW bands in the spectrum screen.
    105. However, the Commission recognizes that this frontier spectrum 
is likely to become increasingly valuable to the advent of 5G services. 
In its competitive analysis of wireless transactions, the spectrum 
screen applicable to lower-band spectrum has been one tool used to help 
identify particular markets for further competitive analysis; it is 
applied on a county-by-county basis and identifies local markets where 
an entity would hold approximately one-third or more of the total 
spectrum suitable and available for the provision of mobile telephony/
broadband services, post-transaction. Similarly, for proposed secondary 
market transactions that would result in an entity holding 1250 
megahertz or more of the total spectrum in the 28 GHz, 37 GHz, and 39 
GHz bands, the Commission will apply its threshold on a county-by-
county basis, and subject such transactions to the Commission's case-
by-case review in order to ensure that the public interest is served. 
As noted above, while this 1250 megahertz spectrum threshold helps to 
identify those markets that provide particular reason for further 
competitive analysis, the Commission's consideration of potential 
competitive harms will not be limited solely to those markets 
identified by the threshold. Establishing this spectrum aggregation 
threshold in the secondary market context recognizes the specific 
characteristics of the

[[Page 79911]]

spectrum while helping to ensure that multiple entities have an 
opportunity to obtain mmW spectrum for deployment of innovative mobile 
technologies.
    106. Summary. The Commission finds, on balance, that the potential 
public interest benefits of adopting a 1250 megahertz limit for 
auctions of this spectrum, and a 1250 megahertz threshold for secondary 
market transactions for these unique spectrum bands outweigh any 
potential public interest harms. Further, adopting these spectrum 
holdings policies is consistent with the Commission's previous 
determination that an ``approximately one-third threshold for total 
spectrum that the Commission uses to identify those holdings in local 
markets that may raise particular competitive concerns'' is an 
effective analytical tool in the secondary market context. The 
Commission anticipates that the potential costs of adopting such 
spectrum holdings policies will be low. The Commission disagrees with 
commenters who argue that it is premature for the Commission to 
establish any spectrum aggregation policies in these bands and that 
such policies will undermine the potential use of this spectrum. On the 
contrary, the Commission finds that establishing such policies that 
will apply as mmW spectrum is introduced into the marketplace will help 
promote competition from the outset. The Commission has explained that 
mmW spectrum holds the potential for a range of uses from supporting 
high capacity networks to use with various IoT applications. While the 
Commission cannot be certain at this time how this spectrum will be 
used, the Commission finds that its anticipated value to the future of 
5G makes it critical that multiple providers have access to it. The 
spectrum holdings policies the Commission adopted will guard against 
consolidation of this spectrum by one or two providers and will 
encourage the development of innovative services to the benefit of the 
American consumer.
7. Performance Requirements
a. Performance Metrics and Milestones
    107. The Commission declines to adopt a unified performance metric 
at this time. Based on the criticisms and alternative suggestions in 
the record, the Commission concludes that such an approach would not 
provide the flexibility necessary to support innovative uses of the 
spectrum, as it would favor one deployment approach over another. A 
unified approach might also deter investment and deployment in these 
bands. The Commission also declines to adopt a ``substantial service'' 
standard of performance for the UMFUS. The Commission determines that 
such a standard, with no firm minimum requirements, would not 
adequately safeguard effective use of spectrum in these bands. The 
Commission also declines to adopt a usage-based metric for performance 
requirements because it is not clear that there is a workable method of 
measuring or enforcing such a requirement. Instead, the Commission 
adopted a series of metrics, tailored for each type of service a 
licensee might choose to offer. Licensees may fulfill their performance 
requirements by showing that they meet their choice of any one of the 
below standards, or a combination of several. This framework is 
intended to provide enough certainty to licensees to encourage 
investment and deployment in these bands as soon as possible, while 
retaining enough flexibility to accommodate both traditional services 
and new or innovative services or deployment patterns. Its increased 
level of firmness over a substantial service metric is also consistent 
with the Commission's recent approach in other services.
    108. The Commission notes that this list of metrics is not intended 
to be exhaustive. The Commission recognizes that the metrics the 
Commission adopted does not cover all possible types of service that 
licensees may seek to offer in these bands, and that new, innovative 
services may be developed with different characteristics that the 
Commission cannot foresee at this time. The Commission therefore seeks 
further comment in the FNPRM on additional metrics that should be 
applied to these innovative services.
    109. The Commission adopted these performance requirements only in 
relation to the end of the initial license terms in these bands. 
Because the Commission believes it is taking action with significant 
lead time before the full development of the technology, the Commission 
believes an interim benchmark might be difficult to meet and may result 
in a substantial number of waiver and extension requests. While the 
Commission does not adopt any ongoing or subsequent performance 
requirements at this time, the Commission strongly encourages licensees 
to deploy networks and services in a timely manner consistent with the 
development of the technology for these bands. The Commission 
emphasizes, however, that the Renewal and Service Continuity proceeding 
(WT Docket No. 10-112), which addresses this issue, remains open, and 
that licensees may be subject to any requirements adopted as part of 
that proceeding at some later date.
    110. Mobile and point-to-multipoint. For mobile and point-to-
multipoint services in the 28 GHz, 37 GHz (geographic area licenses 
only), and 39 GHz bands, the Commission adopted a modified version of 
the Commission's proposal in the NPRM. In order to meet the standards 
for license renewal, a licensee providing mobile service must provide 
coverage to 40 percent of the population of the license area and must 
be using the facilities to provide service. This is a lower portion of 
the population than is the standard for lower frequency bands because 
this level of coverage strikes the appropriate balance between ensuring 
sufficient use of the spectrum and allowing licensees flexibility to 
deploy an emerging technology which may be more suitable for smaller 
coverage areas. The Commission views the current safe harbor of 20 
percent population coverage as inappropriate going forward because the 
new technologies being developed will dramatically increase the 
opportunities to use these bands. Since the Commission is not requiring 
service demonstrations until the end of the license term, the 
Commission believes licensees will have more than adequate time to meet 
this benchmark. Similarly, the Commission does not believe CTIA's 
suggestions of 10 ``connections'' per 10,000 population, or 50 
connections per county, will result in robust build out in these bands. 
Under CTIA's proposed definition of a ``connection,'' these 10 
connections could represent as little as one subscriber accessing the 
network 10 times in one month. This is a particularly low benchmark for 
mobile operations, which is one of the primary target use cases for 
this new service. The Commission does not believe this standard 
represents a sufficient level of service to justify renewal.
    111. The Commission declines to adopt the measurement method the 
Commission proposed in the NPRM and concludes that requiring a specific 
methodology is unnecessary. Instead, the Commission will provide 
licensees with flexibility in terms of how they make their service 
showings, but Commission staff will continue to review showings to 
ensure that they accurately reflect coverage.
    112. Fixed. The Commission does not adopt its proposed method of 
``keyhole contours'' for assigning fixed links a population equivalent. 
Instead, the Commission adopted a more traditional method of 
demonstrating fixed service: the number of links per population in the 
license area. Specifically, the Commission adopted a requirement that

[[Page 79912]]

geographic area licensees providing Fixed Service in the 28 GHz, 39 
GHz, or 37 GHz bands must construct and operate at least four links in 
license areas with less than 268,000 population, and at least one link 
per 67,000 population in license areas with greater population. This 
standard is similar to the standard the Commission established for 
fixed point-to-point services in the 2.3 GHz band. While links in mmW 
bands will presumably be shorter because of the propagation 
characteristics, the higher frequencies will allow more reuse of 
spectrum in a given area. These links must be part of a network that is 
actually providing service, whether to unaffiliated customers or 
private, internal uses, and all links must be present and operational 
at the end of the license term. As with the mobile performance 
milestone, for bands licensed by areas larger than counties the number 
of links and the size of the population will be calculated over the 
entire license area, not county by county.
    113. Satellite. The Commission adopted it proposal from the NPRM. A 
licensee who purchases a 28 GHz UMFUS license may fulfill build-out 
requirements for the license by deploying an earth station in the 
license area that is operational and providing service. The Commission 
notes that a licensee may not fulfill this requirement by leasing a 
portion of its license area to a satellite operator that builds and 
operates an earth station within the leased area. In 37 and 39 GHz, 
because the Commission adopted significantly larger geographic license 
areas than counties, constructing and operating an earth station will 
fulfill the performance requirement only for the county in which it is 
constructed, and not for the entire license area. Satellite operators 
who develop earth stations under the satellite sharing mechanisms the 
Commission adopted for the 28 GHz and 39 GHz bands will continue to be 
subject to the applicable part 25 build-out requirements.
    114. Combination. Licensees whose deployments contain a mix of 
services, for example mobile service combined with fixed backhaul may 
meet the relevant fixed or mobile/point-to-multipoint standard 
separately. The Commission declines to establish a specific formula for 
evaluating such buildouts on a combined basis. Instead, the Commission 
will evaluate such showings on a case-by-case basis, as the Commission 
has done for LMDS.
b. Failure To Meet Buildout Requirements
    115. The Commission adopted a modified version of its proposal, 
tailored to the different license area sizes the Commission adopted for 
each band. For all bands, the Commission adopted its proposal to 
terminate licenses (or portions of licenses, as appropriate) 
automatically if a licensee fails to meet the applicable performance 
requirements, which is widely applied in many wireless services. The 
band-specific approaches to license renewal and termination are 
explained in more detail below. In the accompanying FNPRM, the 
Commission seeks to further develop the record on use-or-share 
obligations.
    116. 28 GHz. The 28 GHz band will be licensed by county because 
partitioning licenses in these bands into license areas smaller than 
counties would be administratively burdensome without providing any 
off-setting benefits to licensees or service providers. Accordingly, if 
a licensee in the 28 GHz band fails to meet the applicable performance 
requirements at the end of its license term, the license for that 
county will terminate immediately in its entirety. As the Commission is 
reissuing the licenses in these band by county rather than by BTA, the 
Commission declines to implement EchoStar's proposal to continue to 
evaluate incumbent licensees' performance on a BTA-wide basis.
    117. 37 and 39 GHz. The 39 GHz band, as well as the 37.6-38.6 GHz 
band, will be licensed by PEAs, rather than counties. In order to 
balance the need to ensure productive use of spectrum with the need to 
encourage investment and deployment, the Commission adopted a modified 
approach to performance requirements in this band.
    118. A licensee who meets the applicable performance requirements 
for the entire PEA, taken as a whole, will be eligible to renew the 
entire license. A licensee who does not meet the requirements for the 
entire license area will have two options: (1) automatic termination of 
the entire license, or (2) partition the license at the county level, 
and return a portion of the license to the Commission such that the 
applicable performance requirements are met for the remaining non-
forfeited area. For example, a licensee of a PEA containing five 
counties of 100,000 people each, who deployed mobile service covering 
60 percent of the population in each of two counties, and made no 
deployments in the other three counties, would be covering only 24 
percent of the total population of the license area. This would not be 
enough to meet performance requirements across the entire license. 
However, the licensee could forfeit the portion of the license covering 
the three un-deployed counties, and retain and renew the portion of the 
license covering the remaining two counties. Similarly, a licensee of 
the same hypothetical PEA who deployed mobile service covering 80 
percent of one county, and 30 percent of another, could retain and 
renew the portion of the license for those two counties because the 
resulting two-county license area would have coverage of 55 percent of 
its population, which exceeds the 40 percent requirement.
c. Treatment of Incumbents
    119. The Commission declines to adopt its proposal from the NPRM. 
For license terms concluding before 2020, licensees may be unable as a 
practical matter to meet the new, more rigorous requirements the 
Commission adopted for these bands at the end of their current license 
terms because of the nascent state of technology. Moreover, providing 
for additional time will provide more effective opportunities for 
licensees to use the spectrum in ways that maximize the flexibility now 
afforded by the Commission's new rules. For example, the transition 
toward providing innovative mobile services is likely to require 
complex business decisions and changes in plans. In short, it is the 
Commission's intent to encourage deployment of new and innovative 
services--particularly mobile service--as efficiently and effectively 
as possible.
    120. Thus, the Commission slightly modifies and extends the 
deadline for meeting the performance requirements pertaining to 
licensees' current licenses for licenses expiring after the adoption 
date of the rules in this proceeding. Specifically, current licensees 
in the 28 GHz and 39 GHz bands who, under the current rules, face a 
deadline for demonstrating substantial service after the adoption date 
of this Report and Order will not be required to demonstrate 
substantial service at renewal. Instead, those licensees will be 
required to fulfill the performance requirements the Commission adopted 
for their respective licenses by June 1, 2024. This approach will allow 
current licensees to focus on growing and transitioning their networks 
in line with new and developing industry standards, which will support 
earlier and more robust deployment of next-generation services in these 
bands.

[[Page 79913]]

d. Alternatives to Performance Requirements
    121. The Commission declines to adopt either of these alternatives 
for these bands. The Communications Act contemplates that the 
Commission will take measures ``to prevent stockpiling or warehousing 
of spectrum by licensees.'' The Commission believes the foregoing 
performance requirements are feasible in these bands, and the best 
method to prevent warehousing in this context. O3b argues that such 
``consecutive license terms with recurring payments'' would simply 
change the financial calculation underpinning warehousing: while the 
initial bid would be smaller and discounted less, the lower price of 
entry could encourage warehousing by reducing the amount initially 
needed to hold on to the spectrum. In the absence of any discussion of 
the ``option payment'' concept, the Commission will not adopt the 
proposal at this time.
8. Permanent Discontinuance of Operations
    122. Under Sec.  1.955(a)(3) of the Commission's rules, an 
authorization will automatically terminate, without specific Commission 
action, if service is ``permanently discontinued.'' In the NPRM, the 
Commission proposed that for UMFUS licensees that identify their 
regulatory status as common carrier or non-common carrier, 
``permanently discontinued'' should be defined as a period of 180 
consecutive days during which the licensee does not provide service to 
at least one subscriber that is not affiliated with, controlled by, or 
related to, the provider in the service area of its license (or smaller 
service area in the case of a partitioned license).
    123. The Commission proposed a different approach for licensees 
that use their licenses for private, internal communications. For these 
services, the Commission proposes to define ``permanent 
discontinuance'' as a period of 180 consecutive days during which the 
licensee does not operate any facilities under the license. The 
Commission proposed that licensees not be subject to this requirement 
until one year after their initial license period ends, to allow them 
adequate time to construct their networks.
    124. The Commission also proposed that when 28 GHz, 37 GHz, or 39 
GHz licensees permanently discontinue service, the licensee must notify 
the Commission of the discontinuance within 10 days, by filing FCC Form 
601 and requesting license cancellation. The Commission further 
proposed that an authorization automatically terminates without 
specific Commission action if service is permanently discontinued, even 
if a licensee fails to file the required form. No commenters discuss 
the permanent discontinuance of service proposals.
    125. The Commission adopted its proposals from the NPRM related to 
permanent discontinuance of operations. Specifically, the Commission 
adopted the two separate proposed definitions of ``permanent 
discontinuance,'' for common carrier and non-common carrier service, 
and for private communications services. The Commission also adopted 
its proposal to wait to implement this requirement until one year after 
the initial license period ends. This approach is consistent with the 
definitions the Commission has adopted for other spectrum bands that 
are licensed for mobile use, including the H Block, AWS-3, and AWS-4 
bands.
    126. The Commission also adopted its proposal that a licensee who 
permanently discontinues service must notify the Commission within 10 
days, and the Commission's proposal that such licenses terminate 
automatically even if a licensee fails to appropriately notify the 
Commission. This approach to permanent discontinuance is consistent 
with Sec.  1.955(a)(3) of the Commission's rules. The permanent 
discontinuance rule is intended to provide operational flexibility 
while ensuring that spectrum does not lie idle for extended periods, 
and the rules the Commission adopted support those goals.
9. Secondary Markets Policies
a. Partitioning and Disaggregation
    127. The Commission's part 101 rules generally allow for geographic 
partitioning and spectrum disaggregation in the LMDS and 39 GHz 
service. Geographic partitioning refers to the assignment of geographic 
portions of a license to another licensee along geopolitical or other 
boundaries. Spectrum disaggregation refers to the assignment of 
discrete amounts of spectrum under the license to another entity. 
Disaggregation allows for multiple transmitters in the same geographic 
area operated by different companies on adjacent frequencies in the 
same band.
    128. In 1997, the Commission determined that all LMDS licensees 
would generally be permitted to disaggregate and partition their 
licenses. The Commission later adopted specific procedural, 
administrative, and operational rules to govern the disaggregation and 
partitioning of LMDS licenses. Similarly, in the same year, the 
Commission concluded that partitioning and disaggregation would be 
permitted in the 39 GHz band and adopted partitioning and 
disaggregation rules in this band as well. The rules require the 
spectrum to be disaggregated by FDD pair in the 39 GHz band.
    129. In the NPRM, the Commission proposed to continue to allow 
partitioning and disaggregation in the 28 and 39 GHz bands, and to 
permit 37 GHz licensees to partition and disaggregate their licenses as 
well. The Commission also proposed to require all parties to a 
partitioning or disaggregation agreement to independently fulfill the 
applicable performance and renewal requirements, which is consistent 
with the current requirements.
    130. Commenters overwhelmingly support allowing secondary market 
transactions in general, and partitioning and disaggregation in 
particular. Intel supports expanding disaggregation in the 39 GHz band 
by also permitting pair-splitting. No commenters oppose allowing 
secondary market transactions generally, or partitioning or 
disaggregation specifically. No commenters discuss performance 
requirements for parties to a partition or disaggregation.
    131. The Commission adopted its proposal in the NPRM to allow 
partitioning and disaggregation of licenses in the 28, 37, and 39 GHz 
bands. As the Commission noted when first establishing partitioning and 
disaggregation rules, allowing such flexibility could facilitate the 
efficient use of spectrum by enabling licensees to make offerings 
directly responsive to market demands for particular types of services, 
increasing competition by allowing new entrants to enter markets, and 
expediting provision of services that might not otherwise be provided 
in the near term. This policy would leave the decision of determining 
the correct size of licenses to the licensees and the marketplace. 
Allowing this flexibility is consistent with the record, and with the 
flexible approach to licensing these bands that the Commission adopted 
in this Report and Order. Because the band plan the Commission adopted 
for the 39 GHz band does not use paired spectrum blocks, the current 
rule that licenses in that band must be disaggregated in pairs will no 
longer apply.
    132. The Commission also adopted its proposal to require all 
parties to a partitioning or disaggregation agreement to independently 
fulfill applicable performance and renewal requirements. According to 
the performance requirements framework the Commission adopted, 
individual

[[Page 79914]]

licensees may choose which metric they fulfill (e.g., fixed, mobile, or 
satellite), but each licensee must make a showing that independently 
satisfies the requirements. This requirement will facilitate efficient 
spectrum use, while enabling service providers to configure geographic 
area licenses and spectrum blocks to meet their operational needs.
b. Spectrum Leasing
    133. In 2003, in order to promote more efficient use of terrestrial 
wireless spectrum through secondary market transactions and in order to 
eliminate regulatory uncertainty, the Commission adopted the Secondary 
Markets First Report and Order, which contained a comprehensive set of 
policies and rules to govern spectrum leasing arrangements between 
terrestrial licensees and spectrum lessees. These policies and rules 
enabled terrestrially-based Wireless Radio Service licensees holding 
``exclusive use'' spectrum rights to lease some or all of the spectrum 
usage rights associated with their licenses to third party spectrum 
lessees. Those third party lessees were then permitted to provide 
wireless services consistent with the underlying license authorization.
    134. This 2003 Order excluded a number of wireless radio services 
from the spectrum leasing rules and policies, including part 101 
services. A year later, the Commission extended the spectrum leasing 
policies to a number of additional wireless services, including part 
101 services. At that time, the Commission also built upon the spectrum 
leasing framework by establishing immediate approval procedures for 
certain categories of terrestrial spectrum leasing arrangements.
    135. In the NPRM, the Commission proposed to apply these spectrum 
leasing policies to the new part 30 radio service governing UMFUS's, 
including all 28 GHz, 37 GHz, and 39 GHz terrestrial licenses. The 
Commission proposed to apply these policies in the same manner that 
they apply to part 101 services.
    136. Many commenters support allowing secondary market transactions 
generally and spectrum leasing specifically. Commenters cite the 
additional flexibility afforded by leasing spectrum, and the market 
certainty granted by using established rules. Several commenters also 
mention that spectrum leasing allows a broader range of entities to 
access licensed spectrum and provides additional competition in the 
marketplace. No commenters oppose allowing spectrum leasing 
arrangements.
    137. The Commission adopted its proposal to allow spectrum leasing 
in the 28 and 39 GHz bands, as well as the portion of the 37 GHz band 
licensed on a geographic area basis. Allowing spectrum leasing in these 
bands will promote more efficient, innovative, and dynamic use of the 
spectrum, expand the scope of available wireless services and devices, 
enhance economic opportunities for accessing spectrum, and promote 
competition among providers. In addition, spectrum leasing policies in 
a particular band generally follow the same approach as the 
partitioning and disaggregation policies for that band. Thus, the 
Commission's adoption of spectrum leasing rules for the 28 GHz, 39 GHz, 
and 37 GHz bands is consistent with the Commission's decision above to 
allow partitioning and disaggregation in these bands as well.
10. Other Operating Requirements
    138. The Commission adopted its proposal in the NPRM to require 
UMFUS licensees to comply with other rule parts that pertain generally 
to wireless communications services, and with any applicable service-
specific rules. This approach will maintain general consistency among 
various wireless communications services. Consistent with the 
Commission's proposal, the Commission will add UMFUS to the definitions 
of Wireless Radio Service and Wireless Telecommunications Service in 
Sec.  1.907 of the Commission's rules. The Commission refrains from 
modifying other existing rules in other rule parts at this time, as no 
commenter has identified any incompatibilities or inconsistencies 
between the UMFUS Service and the existing service-specific or 
generally applicable rules. To consolidate the technical rules for all 
of the types of flexible uses that might be deployed by UMFUS licensees 
under a single rule part, and to maintain consistency between the rules 
that the Commission adopted and the current technical requirements that 
existing LMDS and 39 GHz licensees are subject to, the Commission will 
move the existing part 101 technical rules for traditional point-to-
point and point-to-multipoint operations into part 30.
11. Competitive Bidding Procedures
a. Applicability of Part 1 Competitive Bidding Rules
    139. The Commission proposed in the NPRM to conduct any spectrum 
auction of UMFUS licenses in conformity with the general competitive 
bidding procedures set forth in part 1 subpart Q of the Commission's 
rules. No commenters proposed any alternative or objected. Given the 
Commission's experience in successfully conducting auctions using these 
procedures, the Commission adopted its proposed approach. The 
Commission will employ the part 1 rules governing competitive bidding 
design, designated entity preferences, unjust enrichment, application 
and payment procedures, reporting requirements and the prohibition on 
certain communications between auction applicants--including those 
updates made in the Competitive Bidding Update Report and Order. The 
Commission notes however, that the Commission could modify these 
procedures at a later time.
    140. In discussing the competitive bidding rules, one commenter 
urges that if the Commission adopts county-level licenses, it would be 
critical to permit `package bidding' so that operators could assemble 
larger footprints by bidding on multiple counties at one time. In 
response, two commenters argue that the Commission should not permit 
any form of package bidding because such bidding procedures may make it 
more difficult for small bidders to acquire specific licenses that are 
included in larger packages. Issues involving such bidding procedures 
are more appropriately addressed in a pre-auction proceeding that will 
seek public input on the competitive bidding procedures to be used for 
a particular auction of UMFUS licenses. Accordingly, the Commissions 
defer consideration of such matters to such proceeding(s) where 
interested parties are likely to have a more informed context for such 
input.
b. Small Business Provisions for Geographic Area Licenses
    141. 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.'' One of the principal means by 
which the Commission fulfills this mandate is through the award of 
bidding credits to small businesses. In the Competitive Bidding Second 
Memorandum Opinion and Order, 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. Further, in the Part 1 Third Report and Order 
and the more recent Competitive Bidding

[[Page 79915]]

Update Report and Order, the Commission, while standardizing many 
auction rules, determined that it would continue a service-by-service 
approach to defining small businesses. The Commission recently updated 
its standardized schedule of small business definitions to reflect the 
capital challenges small businesses face in the current wireless 
industry, and in the NPRM the Commission sought comment on whether to 
apply those updated definitions for auctions of spectrum in the UMFUS 
bands.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Under the new standardized schedule, businesses with average 
annual gross revenues for the preceding three years not exceeding $4 
million would be eligible for a 35 percent bidding credit, 
businesses with average annual gross revenues for the preceding 
three years not exceeding $20 million would be eligible for a 25 
percent bidding credit, and businesses with average annual gross 
revenues for the preceding three years not exceeding $55 million 
would be eligible for a 15 percent bidding credit. The Commission 
also adopted a monetary cap on the total amount of bidding credits 
that an eligible small business or rural service provider may be 
awarded in any particular auction. Specifically, the amount of the 
bidding credit cap for a small business in any particular auction 
will not be less than $25 million and the bidding credit cap for the 
total amount of bidding credits that a rural service provider may be 
awarded will not be less than $10 million.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    142. Based on the Commission's prior experience with the use of 
bidding credits in spectrum auctions, the Commission believes that the 
using bidding credits is an effective tool to achieve the statutory 
objective of promoting participation of designated entities in the 
provision of spectrum-based service.
    143. In adopting competitive bidding rules for the 39 GHz band, the 
Commission included provisions for designated entities to promote 
opportunities for small businesses, rural telephone companies, and 
businesses owned by members of minority groups and women to participate 
in the provision of spectrum-based services. Specifically, the 
Commission adopted bidding credits for applicants qualifying as small 
businesses. For auction of licenses in the 39 GHz band, the Commission 
adopted two small business definitions. These two small business 
definitions were later adopted as the highest two of three thresholds 
in the Commission's standardized schedule of bidding credits. In the 
NPRM, the Commission proposed to adopt for the UMFUS the two small 
business definitions with higher gross revenues thresholds reflecting 
the recently adopted updates to the part 1 schedule of small business 
definitions in the Competitive Bidding Update Report and Order. The 
Commission adopted its proposal to apply the two small business 
definitions with higher gross revenues thresholds to auctions of UMFUS 
licenses in the 28, 37, and 39 GHz bands and any other spectrum bands 
that the Commission may subsequently designate for inclusion in the 
UMFUS. Accordingly, an entity with average annual gross revenues for 
the preceding three years not exceeding $55 million will qualify as a 
``small business,'' while an entity with average annual gross revenues 
for the preceding three years not exceeding $20 million will qualify as 
a ``very small business.'' While the capital requirements of the 
services to be deployed in these bands is not yet known, the Commission 
believes that using these gross revenue thresholds will enhance the 
ability of small businesses to acquire and retain capital and thereby 
complete meaningfully at auction. The Commission also believes that 
these thresholds are not overly inclusive, and prevents designated 
entity benefits from flowing to entities for which such credits are not 
necessary. The Commission believes that the various spectrum bands 
included in the UMFUS--spectrum that will be utilized under the same or 
similar technical rules--will be deployed for the same types of 
service, and therefore the two small business definitions with higher 
gross revenues thresholds should apply to all of the bands in the 
UMFUS.
    144. The Commission also adopted its proposal to provide qualifying 
``small businesses'' with a bidding credit of 15 percent and qualifying 
``very small businesses'' with a bidding credit of 25 percent, 
consistent with the standardized schedule in part 1 of the Commission's 
rules. This proposal was modeled on the small business size standards 
and associated bidding credits that the Commission adopted for a range 
of other services, including Advanced Wireless Services in the AWS-1 
band. The Commission believes that this two-tiered approach has been 
successful in the past, and will once again utilize it. The Commission 
uses the existing 39 GHz service rules as a starting point, but adjusts 
the bidding credit levels to be consistent with the schedule in part 1 
of the Commission's rules. The Commission believes that use of the 
small business definitions and associated bidding credits set forth in 
the part 1 bidding credit schedule will provide consistency and 
predictability for small businesses. No commenter provides any 
alternative or reason why the Commission's bidding credit thresholds or 
small business definitions would not work in this service. Accordingly 
the Commission adopted its proposals regarding small business 
definitions and bidding credits.
c. Rural Service Provider Provisions for Geographic Area Licenses
    145. The rural service provider bidding credit awards a 15 percent 
bidding credit to those servicing predominantly rural areas and that 
have fewer than 250,000 combined wireless, wireline, broadband and 
cable subscribers. In the NPRM, the Commission stated that in the 
absence of comments to the contrary, the Commission would leave open 
the option for future bidding applicants to apply for rural service 
provider bidding credits in lieu of a small business bidding credits. 
The Commission now decides that the Commission will apply the rural 
service provider bidding credit to auctioning the 28 GHz, 37 GHz and 39 
GHz bands. Although the Commission has not received comments about this 
issue, the Commission believes that a targeted bidding credit will 
better enable rural service providers to compete for spectrum licenses 
at auction and in doing so, will increase the availability of 5G 
service in rural areas.
d. Small Business and Rural Service Provider Bidding Credit Caps
    146. In the Competitive Bidding Update Report and Order, the 
Commission adopted a process for establishing a reasonable monetary 
limit or cap on the amount of bidding credits that an eligible small 
business or rural service provider may be awarded in any particular 
auction. The Commission established the parameters to implement a 
bidding credit cap for future auctions on an auction-by-auction basis. 
Consistent with the Commission's longstanding approach, after adoption 
of all of the necessary service rules for the UMFUS, the Commission 
will initiate a public notice process to solicit public input on 
certain details of auction design and the auction procedures for the 
initial auction of UMFUS licenses. As part of that process, the 
Commission will solicit public input on the appropriate amount of the 
bidding credit cap and subsequently establish the cap that will apply 
for that auction, based on an evaluation of the expected capital 
requirements presented by the particular spectrum being auctioned and 
the inventory of licenses to be auctioned.
e. Tribal Lands Bidding Credit
    147. The tribal lands bidding credit program awards a discount to a 
winning bidder for serving qualifying tribal land that have a wireline 
telephone

[[Page 79916]]

subscription rate equal to or less than 85 percent of the population. 
The Commission believes that tribal entities involved in the 
telecommunications industry face unique challenges in participating in 
spectrum auctions and that the tribal lands bidding credit will promote 
further deployment and use of spectrum over tribal lands. No commenters 
oppose the tribal land bidding credit nor suggest that the tribal lands 
bidding credit is unnecessary. Accordingly, a winning bidder for a 
market will be eligible to receive a credit for serving qualifying 
Tribal lands within that market, provided it complies with the 
applicable competitive bidding rules.
f. Bidding Process Options
    148. Finally, the Commission also sought comment in the NPRM on 
whether the Commission should revise any of the Commission's bidding 
process and payment rules to ameliorate the administrative difficulties 
the Commission could potentially face in enforcing the construction 
requirements in the 3,143 counties nationwide. One alternative the 
Commission discussed was to allow prospective millimeter wave licensees 
to bid, in a single auction, on licenses that have consecutive terms of 
license rights in a given geographic area--i.e., licensees could bid at 
auction for the right to obtain a license in a given county not just 
for a single license term, but for each subsequent five-year license 
term; and the winning bidder would pay an auction-determined fee, in 
lieu of other performance requirements before the start of each term. 
Once a winning bidder made this payment, a new license would issue for 
the next consecutive license term. Some commenters support adopting 
such payments in lieu of performance requirements. However several 
commenters criticize the approach as incentivizing spectrum 
warehousing. For example, O3b notes that consecutive license terms with 
recurring payments would simply change the financial calculation 
underpinning warehousing: while the initial bid would be smaller and 
discounted less, the lower price of entry could encourage warehousing 
by reducing the amount initially needed to hold on to the spectrum. The 
Commission declines to adopt recurring payments as an alternative to 
performance requirements in this order and note it is unlikely the 
Commission would adopt such payments given the Commission's review of 
the record and further consideration of the factors affecting these 
bands. In the NPRM, the Commission speculated that these payments could 
incentivize deployment of network facilities and discourage spectrum 
warehousing because a licensee would be unlikely to pay the auction 
price for successive terms for spectrum it did not intend to use. 
However, the Commission believes there is a strong likelihood that 
bidders would still warehouse spectrum and leave it fallow if the cost 
of the recurring payment to the spectrum holder was outweighed by the 
benefit derived from foreclosing other operators' access to the 
spectrum. This would counter the Commission's goal of accelerating 
deployment in these bands. Accordingly the Commission declines to adopt 
this proposal.
12. Security
    149. The FCC's approach to cybersecurity proceeds from the view 
that communications providers are generally in the best position to 
evaluate and address risks to their network operations. This approach 
recognizes the importance of private sector leadership and innovation 
in cybersecurity, and it reduces the need for ongoing regulatory 
involvement in private sector security practices. It will prove 
successful, though, only if the private sector aggressively addresses 
evolving threats through security-by-design, even where short-term 
market incentives may not be sufficient to drive long-term security 
investments before harm is realized.
    150. Emerging security standards for new flexible uses of the mmW 
bands (and ``5G'' more broadly) are developing in parallel, but not 
necessarily at the same pace, with the emerging networks, devices, and 
equipment. While CTIA has observed that significant, multi-stakeholder, 
multi-disciplinary, and ``multi-layered'' efforts are ongoing, 
domestically and globally, ``to assure that [5G] network and [mmW] 
device security is preserved to the maximum extent feasible,'' the 
Commission must acknowledge that to date many wireless communications 
systems have not been successful at implementing security-by-design. 
The Commission recognize that, in the race to market, vital security 
protections too often fall by the wayside.
    151. The Commission took narrowly tailored steps to help promote an 
environment that encourages the early and ongoing consideration of 
security issues by all private sector participants, including 
infrastructure and device firms, established communications firms, and 
new entrants to communications markets. New mmW-based networks will 
enable valuable new services, and accelerating the deployment of those 
services is a national priority. Those benefits, however, will be 
undermined if security risks are not managed by licensees. Accordingly, 
the Commission is moving expeditiously both to meet the need for new 
mmW spectrum for next generation services and to help ensure that 
security for these services is built in from the beginning, not left as 
an afterthought. In this approach, the Commission concurs with 
stakeholders who identify that there is an opportunity to take action 
now--before the technology is mature or the services deployed--to 
encourage, from the outset, the development of necessary cybersecurity 
protections alongside the development of emerging services and 
technologies.
    152. In the NPRM, the Commission recognized the significance of 
security to 5G networks and the future devices enabled by and 
connecting to them. Because of the implications related to both sets of 
issues, the Commission sought comment on how to secure mmW band 
devices, networks, and their communications, and specifically on ``how 
to ensure that effective security features are built into key design 
principles for all mmW band communications devices and networks.'' The 
Commission expressed a belief in the value of ``security-by-design'' 
that is motivated by the Commission's expectations that these networks 
may provide capabilities for a wide variety of new devices and 
applications, including, among others, traditional mobile 
communications capabilities, IoT and other applications as well as 
devices critical to public safety and related services that provide 
essential protections to the nation. The Commission indicated that 
security by design means ensuring that the goals that drive the 
development of networks and devices include achieving an objective 
state of security. In that context, the Commission explained that the 
security constructs of confidentiality, integrity, and availability 
help us gain insight into security generally, and that security-by-
design can help ensure that the next generation of wireless networks 
meets these critical components of a secure network. Several commenters 
expressed their support for this approach.
    153. The Commission continues to believe in the significant 
benefits of security by design, including the benefits that the 
Commission would expect to flow from using the confidentiality, 
integrity, and availability construct for assessing, planning and 
incorporating security elements into networks and devices as early as 
possible in their developmental

[[Page 79917]]

stages. Indeed, the record demonstrates that security elements are 
appropriate and important for service providers and equipment 
developers to consider now, during the development process, as well as 
part of an ongoing discussion as networks and devices are deployed and 
operated.
    154. For example, one commenter notes that the ``network-based hop-
to-hop security approach used to secure the path between communications 
users will not be sufficient for differentiated end-to-end security for 
certain 5G services.'' Systems are in need of a ``secure architecture, 
stringent identity management and data protection, more rigorous 
authentication methods, and an array of system-level protections to 
defend against distributed denial of service . . . attacks and other 
intrusions.'' Accordingly, the commenter believes that security 
features that are incorporated into 5G systems by design would provide 
a significant advantage over any ``built on top of'' system design. 
Since the service and network architecture of 5G is going through 
dramatic remodeling, the commenter maintains it will ``improve the 
feature and competitive strength for 5G if security protection is 
included at an early stage.''
    155. The view that security should be a fundamental component in 
the design of any new network architecture and protocols is also shared 
by 5G Americas, which underscores the heightened sense that security is 
expected to take on as new technology and services are deployed. For 
example, 5G Americas states that 5G systems are expected to provide 
important applications such as ``smart grids, telemedicine, industrial 
control, public safety and automotive, [which] have security 
requirements to defend against intrusion and to ensure uninterrupted 
operations.'' Other commenters offer additional examples illustrating 
why it is appropriate and important to build security elements into 
considerations that go into developing networks and devices. For 
instance, AT&T notes a variety of developments that will have security 
implications: ``machine to machine communications will contemplate 
energy optimization, reduced signaling, and massive connectivity. With 
these advancements, IoT [Internet of Things] will become a reality. 5G 
systems will be capable of supporting a range of machine-to-machine 
services, from connected cars to smart cities to telemedicine and 
beyond.'' Highly secure 5G systems will be expected even in times of 
stress. As FiberTower notes, ``reliance on 5G will only increase in the 
event of a man-made or naturally occurring outage in a critical 
service.'' To support these needs, the Commission believes 5G services 
will need to be highly secure prior to deployment, and the Commission 
thinks it reasonable that the Commission be apprised of security plans 
in place prior to 5G services becoming operational.
    156. Based on the Commission's analysis of the record, the 
Commission can best facilitate adoption of security-by-design 
approaches by promoting an open dialogue about security practices that 
would be consistent with a discussion at a standards organization. 
Therefore, the Commission is asking to receive from licensees--before 
they begin operations--general statements, at a level consistent with 
the open forum standards body discussions, of their plans for 
safeguarding their networks and devices from security breaches. 
Requiring licensees to submit that information at that juncture creates 
an incentive for them to engage in the development of security measures 
at an earlier stage. The specific information that the Commission 
receives will also facilitate the Commission's ability to help in 
identifying security risks, including areas where more attention to 
security may be needed, and in disseminating information about 
successful practices for addressing the risks. Moreover, this approach 
avoids the drawbacks of imposing prescriptive security mandates--e.g., 
downsides such as the likelihood that one size will not fit all, the 
lack of agility in responding to changing circumstances and 
technologies, and the rigidity that such mandates tend to introduce 
into systems at the outset--thereby preserving for operators, equipment 
developers, and other interested parties significant flexibilities for 
addressing security concerns.
    157. As described in detail below, the provision that the 
Commission adopted promotes ``security-by-design'' approaches within 
the mmW network and product development environment, in ways that 
should (i) minimally impact (but appropriately enhance the prospects 
for security ``assurance'') ongoing design and development with respect 
to this nascent technology, (ii) facilitate integration of network and 
product development with the timeline for standards development, and 
(iii) encourage early participation in and monitoring of such standards 
development. This provision--a requirement that each licensee discuss 
at a high level how confidentiality, integrity, and availability 
principles are reflected in its network security design planning in a 
Statement submitted to the Commission prior to commencing operations--
should also help inform the Commission's collective understanding and 
strategies for addressing security issues in the next generation of 
communications networks. More specifically, the Commission is requiring 
licensees to file a Statement with the Commission within three years 
after grant of the license, but no later than six months prior to 
deployment. This time period accords with the Commission's security-by-
design goals while leaving flexibility for licensees depending on when 
they are able to deploy service. The Statement must be signed by a 
senior executive within the licensee's organization with personal 
knowledge of the organization's security plans and practices, within 
the licensee's organization, and must include, at a minimum, the 
following elements:
     A high-level, general description of the licensee's 
security approach designed to safeguard the planned network's 
confidentiality, integrity, and availability with respect to 
communications from: a device to the licensee's network; one element of 
the licensee's network to another element on the licensee's network; 
the licensee's network to another network; and device to device (with 
respect to telephone voice and messaging services).
     A high-level, general description of the licensee's 
anticipated approach to assessing and mitigating cyber risk induced by 
the presence of multiple participants in the band. This should include 
the high level approach taken toward ensuring consumer network 
confidentiality, integrity, and availability security principles, which 
are to be protected in each of the following use cases: communications 
between a wireless device and the licensee's network; communications 
within and between each licensee's network; communications between 
mobile devices that are under end-to-end control of the licensee; and 
communications between mobile devices that are not under the end-to-end 
control of the licensee.
     A high-level description of cybersecurity standards and 
practices to be employed, whether industry-recognized or related to 
some other identifiable approach;
     A description of the extent to which the licensee 
participates in standards bodies or industry-led organizations pursuing 
the development or maintenance of emerging security standards and/or 
best practices;
     The high-level identification of any other approaches to 
security, unique to the services and devices the licensee intends to 
offer and deploy; and

[[Page 79918]]

     Plans to incorporate relevant outputs from Information 
Sharing and Analysis Organizations (ISAOs) as elements of the 
licensee's security architecture. Plans should include comment on 
machine-to-machine threat information sharing, and any use of 
anticipated standards for ISAO-based information sharing.
    158. The intent of the disclosures is to facilitate multi-
stakeholder peer review and earlier development of devices and a 
commercially viable market for the service. The Commission recognizes 
that the Statements concern the cybersecurity of the Commission's 
nation's critical communications infrastructure and, accordingly, the 
content of the Statements should be at a high-level and not include 
information that, if publicly disclosed, would create a significant 
risk to the security of this infrastructure or related systems and 
networks. The Commission also recognizes that an entity's cybersecurity 
posture can be a competitive differentiator and that unauthorized 
disclosures of Statements containing more detailed information could 
result in competitive harm to the licensee. Here again, the Commission 
concludes that the Statements should not provide information at a level 
of granularity that its public disclosure would jeopardize the 
competitive position of the licensee. For example, the Commission 
expects that these disclosures will contain information that could be 
disclosed at a standards meeting where stakeholders gather to share 
ideas and information for the purpose of advancing the state of the 
art. If, however, licensees intend to submit information that warrant 
confidential treatment, they may seek confidential treatment pursuant 
to the Commission's rules. Furthermore, the information required to be 
submitted under this rule as it relates to security plans and practices 
will not be used for the purpose of enforcing compliance with the 
Communications Act or any of the Commission's rules, other than the 
requirement of filing such Statements.
    159. The Commission finds that appropriate cybersecurity safeguards 
are a fundamental part of the development and deployment of mmW systems 
and services contemplated by this Report and Order. The reporting 
requirement the Commission adopted will not only help ensure that 
industry focuses the necessary degree of attention throughout these 
development and deployment processes on the most effective ways to 
include these safeguards at the earlier possible points, but it will 
also keep the Commission informed of the ongoing progress in this area 
so the Commission can provide timely, measured and effective responses 
to address any emerging problems before they become intractable. It 
will also be important to consider how best to ensure that the types of 
cyber safeguards that the Commission encourages for the mmW bands will 
be incorporated more broadly into future so called 5G networks and 
services. Consequently, the Commission directs the OET, the Public 
Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (PSHSB), and the WTB to, by not 
later than October 31, 2016, issue in a separate docket a Notice of 
Inquiry (NOI) exploring the security implications and solutions in 
future 5G networks, beyond the actions the Commission took in this 
Report and Order. The Commission believes this NOI is an opportunity to 
look holistically at the potential security implications in future 5G 
networks offering different types of services to different types of 
users (e.g., wireless broadband, low-data-rate IoT applications, high-
data-rate IoT applications). It will also provide a collaborative 
vehicle for exploring 5G security-related threats, solutions, and best 
practices in order to address the implications more effectively. The 
NOI is not intended to duplicate or replace ongoing or future 5G 
security architecture and 5G design work by standards bodies, industry 
or academic groups, but instead to facilitate common appreciation 
across the 5G ecosystem for the evolving security standards. The NOI 
will also provide an opportunity for stakeholders to identify new 5G 
issues as new IoT functions are developed in 5G, and as national 
security, public safety, critical infrastructure industries, and 
consumers begin to understand the implications and potential 
opportunities of 5G.

G. Technical Rules

1. Flexible Duplexing Rules
    160. Consistent with the Commission's proposal in the NPRM, the 
Commission adopted flexible duplexing rules for the 27.5-28.35 GHz, 37-
38.6 GHz, and 38.6-40 GHz bands. While the comments indicate that TDD 
is the duplexing scheme licensees are most likely to deploy in the 
bands, the Commission sees no reason to prevent them from using other 
technologies. Therefore, the rules the Commission adopted will allow 
any type of duplexing to be deployed, subject to other technical rules 
to manage interference. The Commission also adopted changes to the 39 
GHz channel plan, as discussed in more detail in Section I.B.5 (39 GHz 
Band (38.6-40 GHz)), which will accommodate more flexible duplexing 
schemes.
2. Transmission Power Limits and Antenna Height
a. Base Stations
    161. The Commission believes that an increase in the maximum base 
station power from what the NPRM proposed is necessary for two reasons. 
First, the 62 dBm/100 MHz EIRP power limit proposed in the NPRM will 
limit UMFUS base stations to a much lower power density than is 
permitted for other mobile services. For example, Personal 
Communications Service (PCS) and AWS base stations are permitted to 
transmit at 62 dBm/MHz EIRP, which would permit a total EIRP of 82 dBm 
for a 100 MHz signal. The Commission sees no reason why UMFUS should be 
limited to a lower power density than PCS and AWS. Second, the 
propagation properties in the mmW band make higher powers necessary. 
Signal attenuation with distance is higher in the mmW bands than at 
lower frequencies and signals are more severely attenuated due to 
obstacles such as foliage and walls. As the simulations submitted by 
commenters illustrate, higher signal powers are necessary to permit 
relatively modest base station coverage areas and to increase data 
throughput. Unnecessarily limiting the base station power in the mmW 
bands by applying the existing part 27 base station limit could unduly 
inhibit future technologies and applications.
    162. The Commission adopted a base station power limit of 75 dBm/
100 MHz EIRP as the base station power limit for the 28 GHz, the 37 GHz 
and 39 GHz bands. For channel bandwidths less than 100 megahertz the 
permitted EIRP will be reduced below 75 dBm proportionally and linearly 
based on the bandwidth relative to 100 megahertz. Because the 
technology for providing mobile services in these bands is still being 
developed, the appropriate transmitted power requirements for this 
equipment cannot be definitively known at this time. This 75 dBm/100 
MHz limit represents a consensus that has been endorsed by the 
commenters who have expressed an intention to manufacture UMFUS 
equipment. Therefore, the Commission is confident that this power level 
will provide the equipment manufacturers and future licensees with the 
flexibility needed to deploy service in these bands. Because of the 
early stage of development of UMFUS technology, the Commission will 
monitor how this technology develops and revisit the base station

[[Page 79919]]

power limit in the future if it becomes necessary.
    163. The Commission is not persuaded by those commenters who do not 
favor increasing the base stations power limit above the level proposed 
in the NPRM. Boeing's claim that the 75 dBm limit is inconsistent with 
the operational range of 5G applications is contradicted by the 
simulation results that show the benefits of increasing the maximum 
power beyond 62 dBm and the consensus among equipment manufacturers 
that 75 dBm is a reasonable power limit for UMFUS base stations. 
Furthermore, the Commission's rules for the 37.5-40.0 GHz band, about 
which Boeing expresses sharing concerns, limit the FSS to gateway-type 
earth station operations and prohibit the ubiquitous deployment of 
satellite earth stations designed to serve individual consumers. The 
Commission does not believe that the higher power limit the Commission 
is adopting will significantly affect the limited gateway FSS 
operations permitted in the band because the Commission is providing a 
means for gateway earth stations in the band to obtain protection from 
terrestrial transmissions. As for SES Americom's and Avanti's concerns, 
the Commission explained in Section I.G.2.d. (Terrestrial Aggregate 
Interference Concerns to FSS Satellite Receivers in 28 GHz), that the 
Commission does not believe the Commission needs to take specific 
action with respect to aggregate interference to satellite receivers in 
the 28 GHz band at this time. The Commission therefore will not unduly 
restrict the development of UMFUS by limiting the base station transmit 
power.
    164. The Commission will not adopt a different power limit for 
equipment that is used to provide both mobile services and backhaul. As 
the NPRM noted, several commenters to the NOI suggested that it might 
be feasible to deploy such 5G equipment. The Commission notes that 
those commenters did not address this subject in response to the NPRM 
and no other commenters specifically request higher power limits for 
such equipment. The Commission believes that by adopting a higher power 
limit for base stations than proposed in the NPRM, the Commission is 
also providing adequate power to ensure successful deployment for 
combined access/backhaul equipment. In addition, the Commission will 
not limit base station antenna height at this time because no 
commenters address the issue. Instead, the Commission shall seek 
further comment on this topic in the FNPRM.
    165. Compliance with the transmit power limit shall be ascertained 
with over the air measurement of EIRP of the device under test (DUT). 
As Qualcomm has stated, mmW devices are being designed with an array of 
multiple antennas employing dynamic beamforming and that these designs 
make verification of transmitter power, EIRP, and antenna gain 
challenging. In this early stage of mmW development, compliance testing 
will be challenging because of lack of test equipment and/or facilities 
that can accurately measure over the air EIRP of the DUT and the need 
to account for the introduction of antenna arrays and beamforming. Even 
so, OET has issued a number of Knowledge Database (KDB) publications 
that delineate measurement procedures for testing of antenna 
arrays.\10\ Moreover, OET will address the further development of mmW 
measurement procedures with input from industry stakeholders and other 
interested parties and issue further KDB guidance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Federal Communications Commission, Office of 
Engineering and Technology, Laboratory Division, Emissions Testing 
of Transmitters with Multiple Outputs in the Same Band (October 31, 
2013) and MIMO with Cross-Polarized Antenna (October 25, 2011) 
(https://apps.fcc.gov/kdb/GetAttachment.html?id=B0ZQiTBTVsn3P3wZ2WdqhQ%3D%3D and https://apps.fcc.gov/kdb/GetAttachment.html?id=i%2BFRza%2B2Hh0pf9nHJHJGHw%3D%3D). The 
Commission notes that OET has developed a substantial body of 
additional guidance that is available via public notices, frequently 
asked questions (FAQ's), and specific process guidance that is 
compiled in our online Knowledge Database (KDB). Equipment 
authorization topics that relate to new services and devices 
authorized by the Commission are often addressed in the KDB. This 
includes, for example, simple answers to questions, guidance on how 
to file for authorization of new types of devices, and guidance on 
how to conduct rule compliance testing. The staff guidance provided 
in the KDB is intended to assist the public in following Commission 
requirements. The guidance is not binding on the Commission and will 
not preclude the Commission from making a different decision in any 
matter that comes to its attention for resolution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Mobile Stations
    166. As proposed in the NPRM, the Commission adopted a 43 dBm EIRP 
maximum mobile power limit in the 27.5-28.35 GHz, 37-38.6 GHz, and 
38.6-40 GHz bands. The simulations and analyses by commenters indicate 
that this power level will be sufficient to provide the expected range 
and data rates. In addition, the power level is consistent with the 
Commission's rules for part 15 devices in the 57-64 GHz band that have 
been in place since 1995. The Commission is also encouraged by the 
strong support for this power limit, especially from commenters who 
indicate that they will manufacture equipment for these bands.
    167. The Commission notes that UMFUS devices will be expected to 
comply with the Commission's rules regarding radiofrequency radiation 
exposure in addition to complying with the 43 dBm EIRP limit the 
Commission adopted. These radiofrequency radiation exposure rules 
specify more stringent exposure limits for devices that are designed to 
be used within 20 centimeters of the user's body. The Commission 
recognizes that such devices may have to limit their transmit power 
below the 43 dBm limit to meet exposure limits.
c. Transportable Stations
    168. The Commission agrees with the majority of commenters that 
there is a need for an additional class of transportable stations 
requiring a maximum allowable power limit higher than the 43 dBm 
adopted for mobile user equipment stations. Higher power for such 
devices will increase range, enable higher data rates and provide for 
better coverage throughout buildings, which will allow consumers 
flexibility in installation locations to provide service where needed. 
These devices could be used to provide residential broadband service, 
which as the simulation results provided by Nokia illustrate will 
benefit from a higher transmit power than the Commission is allowing 
for mobile stations. The Commission adopted a 55 dBm EIRP maximum power 
limit for this for this class of equipment, which the Commission shall 
refer to as transportable stations. This 55 dBm limit represents a 
consensus that has been endorsed by commenters who have expressed an 
intention to manufacture UMFUS equipment. The Commission notes that in 
adopting this higher power limit for transportable stations that such 
devices will be expected to comply with the Commission's rules 
regarding radiofrequency exposure.
    169. No commenter has proposed a definition of transportable 
devices for purposes of the Commission's rules. However, the 
terminology that most commenters have used suggests that such devices 
will be stationary while operating. Therefore, the Commission shall 
define a transportable device as transmitting equipment that is not 
intended to be used while in motion, but rather at stationary 
locations. The Commission believes this definition is appropriate 
because it will exclude portable devices that are meant to be carried 
by people while operating such as mobile phones or smart phones from 
transmitting at the higher power level. One commenter has suggested 
that these transportable devices could be built into

[[Page 79920]]

vehicles, which implies that they should be permitted to operate while 
in motion. The Commission has chosen not to expand the Commission's 
definition to include devices in moving vehicles because such devices 
in general will not need to transmit signals that penetrate walls and 
therefore will not require more power than mobile devices.
d. Terrestrial Aggregate Interference Concerns to FSS Satellite 
Receivers in 28 GHz
    170. The analyses, provided by commenters, leads us to conclude 
that specific technical limits on UMFUS stations are not necessary at 
this time to address aggregate interference. As discussed in more 
detail below, the information in the record shows a wide disparity 
between assumptions and illustrates that much work must be done to 
accurately model mmW systems and the effects that these systems might 
have on co-channel satellite receivers. As a result, the Commission 
does not want to unduly restrict the development and growth of UMFUS 
unless the Commission has adequate evidence that actual harm will 
occur. The Commission does not believe the record demonstrates that 
there is a risk of interference to satellites from aggregate 
interference caused by UMFUS stations. Consequently, the Commission 
will not adopt a limit on aggregate skyward interference from 28 GHz 
band UMFUS stations or require that UMFUS stations employ specific 
techniques to reduce skyward emissions. The Commission observes that 
features such as antenna downtilt, suppression of sidelobes and 
adaptive power control will occur naturally because they are inherent 
characteristics of anticipated 5G technologies.
    171. The analyses provided by the satellite operators are based on 
very conservative assumptions and provide for a worst case scenario 
regarding aggregate interference from future terrestrial networks. For 
example, the satellite analyses appear to assume terrestrial devices 
will continuously operate at maximum power levels and do not account 
for the fact that many UMFUS deployments will occur indoors. Most of 
the satellite analyses assume all terrestrial devices will be line of 
sight to the satellites with the exception of the analysis submitted 
jointly by the Satellite Operators, which assumes only a 9.6 dB 
attenuation for a 90% non-line of sight scenario. These analyses also 
assume a -12.2 dB interference criteria, which the Joint Filers point 
out has been under past review in language reflected in a Conference 
Preparatory Meeting report to WRC-15. The Joint Filers also note that 
some system parameters provided by Satellite Industry Association 
(SIA), such as satellite noise and receive beam gain, are based on the 
most sensitive projections about future, planned satellite network 
deployments, not necessarily satellite networks that currently exist.
    172. While the Joint Filer's simulation results are not based on as 
conservative assumptions as the satellite operators, they vividly 
illustrate how the assumptions made can lead to vastly different 
conclusions. Assumptions such as the antenna pattern of the UMFUS 
devices, how many of the devices are line of sight to the satellites, 
the characteristics of the satellites, and the satellite interference 
criteria clearly can make an enormous difference in the number of 
devices that may transmit without interference occurring. Given that 
mmW technology is just being developed and the deployment scenarios of 
these devices are uncertain, many of these assumptions are speculative 
at this point and any conclusions that can be drawn from analyses or 
simulations at this point are necessarily tentative. The Commission 
also observes that no information has been submitted into the record as 
to how terrestrial licensees would demonstrate compliance with a limit 
on aggregate energy at each satellite or each point in the sky. While 
the Commission concludes that the various studies submitted by the 
parties do not support establishment of an aggregate interference limit 
or adoption of specific technical requirements to reduce skyward 
emissions, they do indicate the need for additional study on the effect 
of aggregate interference on satellite receivers. The Commission 
expects that the parties will continue to study this issue and inform 
the Commission of the outcome. The Commission will revisit this issue 
if additional information comes to the Commission's attention 
suggesting that regulatory requirements are necessary.
3. Out-of-Band Emission Limits
a. Use of Conductive Emission Limits
    173. One of the implications of requiring an EIRP metric for the 
OOBE limit is that a transmitter has to meet the limit along the 
maximum EIRP direction. This makes meeting the radiative OOBE limit 
particularly challenging, as recognized by the commenters. In the mmW 
band, transmitters require higher gain antennas to compensate for 
significantly higher propagation losses and consequently the antennas 
will, in general, have much smaller beamwidth, as compared to other 
lower band mobile systems. As a result, OOBE of mmW transmitters have 
highly directive characteristics, concentrating the transmission power 
along a narrow beam in the direction of maximum EIRP. Furthermore, 
because the beam is narrow and because a transmitter needs to track the 
relative movement of its intended receiver in order to maintain the 
communication link, the OOBE of the mmW transmitter should be spatially 
averaged over the path of the receiver to reflect the spatially 
transient nature of the transmitter OOBE. In this regard, Qualcomm 
states that, ``based on its simulations to date, the average 
interference from a mobile and a base-station/small cell with a 
steerable/selectable array is very different and variable when compared 
to a fixed link. With mobile operations, the interference impact 
differs from fixed links due to the dynamic nature of the array, for it 
points in different directions as mobile users move and are served.'' 
The Commission believes these features of the mmW spectrum make the 
OOBE limit in the maximum EIRP direction less significant and a 
spatially averaged OOBE limit more appropriate. One way to spatially 
average OOBE of a transmitter is to determine its out of band TRP or by 
extension of its out of band conductive power.\11\ To set forth a more 
suitable OOBE metric that reflects the aforementioned features of mmW 
band, the Commission should express the OOBE limit as an equivalent 
conductive limit. An equivalent conductive limit is consistent with the 
OOBE rule for other mobile systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ TRP of a transmitter is closely related to its' conductive 
power. In fact, TRP is product of antenna radiation efficiency, 
er, and conductive power P (TRP =erP and 
depending on antenna efficiency TRP can be virtually the same as the 
conductive power P. See W.L. Stutzman and Gary A. Thiele, Antenna 
Theory and Design, 2013, equations 13-40 and 2-155.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    174. Compliance with a conductive OOBE limit in the mobile mmW 
systems will be the same as other mobile systems where access to the 
antenna RF port(s) is available. Where access to the RF port(s) is not 
available, a somewhat more complicated process is necessary. For each 
frequency (or band), an emission measurement of the DUT must be 
performed along the direction of the maximum EIRP. The EIRP measurement 
value is then adjusted for the antenna gain along the same direction as 
the measured EIRP and at the same frequency (or band) to obtain a 
conductive OOBE power of the device. This process needs to be performed 
for

[[Page 79921]]

both polarization and, the respective conductive OOBE power summed, to 
obtain the total conductive OOBE power of the device. To obtain the 
antenna gain, licenses should use a validated antenna pattern 
computation, manufacturer supplied antenna pattern, or any other 
approach acceptable to the Commission as may be described in OET's KDB 
publications. The Commission recognizes that under certain 
circumstances the DUT antenna may interact with its supporting 
structure sufficiently enough that the interaction may require 
consideration through simulation or by an additional measurement step. 
One way to identify such circumstances may be through the antenna 
pattern validation step. Other means of identifying and considering 
such circumstances may be described in OET's KDB publications.
    175. With respect to TRP, TRP measurement requires EIRP measurement 
of the device under test around spherical surface of the device for 
both polarizations, and as a result it can be time consuming and 
difficult. A reverberation chamber is deemed to be one of the most 
practical means of TRP measurement. However, as noted by Straight Path, 
TRP measurement in a reverberation chamber requires conducted power 
measurement of power amplifiers. Straight Path further argues that 
given that in many cases 5G transceiver power amplifiers and antennas 
may be integrated on a single printed circuit board, it is unclear how 
conducted measurement can be achieved for transceivers. Moreover, even 
if access to RF ports were to be made available, a conductive 
measurement would be far easier and economical to perform than TRP, as 
no over the air measurement would be required for conductive 
measurement. However, given that a number of commenters have requested 
TRP as a metric for OOBE, and given that TRP is a spatial averaging 
method, the Commission will allow TRP as the alternate metric for 
compliance. As there are no TRP measurement procedures currently 
defined, new measurement procedures will be developed through the FCC 
Laboratory's KDB process.
    176. In the NPRM the Commission proposed a radiated OOBE limit that 
requires licensees to attenuate their unwanted radiated emission power 
below the transmission power (P) by a factor of at least 43 + 
10log10(P) per MHz (or an absolute power of -13 dBm/MHz) for 
any emissions on frequencies outside the licensee's authorized 
spectrum. This radiated OOBE limit is consistent with the conductive 
OOBE limit that the Commission has generally required for other mobile 
systems. In addition, a number of commenters state that using TRP as a 
metric the proposed OOBE attenuation factor or absolute power of -
13dBm/MHz would be feasible. For these reasons the Commission has set 
the OOBE limit for both conductive metric and TRP metric to -13 dBm/
MHz. This may be used as a basis for developing further requirements 
that relate to transmitter performance by industry standard 
organizations. This limit applies to base stations, transportable, and 
mobile stations.
    177. With respect to dBr radiated emission mask, the mask is 
significantly more relaxed than the -13 dBm/MHz absolute limit that a 
number of commenters support. In addition, the Commission finds that 
the equivalent conductive limit (or alternatively TRP) is the 
appropriate metric for OOBE in this band. For these reasons, the 
Commission declines to adopt the dBr radiated emission mask that 
Qualcomm proposes.
b. Licensed Block Edge Region
    178. The Commission agrees with Ericsson, and some of the other 
commenters that a bandwidth-dependent unwanted emission requirement at 
the first megahertz adjacent to the licensed block discriminates 
against broadband systems. However, a bandwidth-independent unwanted 
emission requirement at the channel edge may not be sufficient for very 
large bandwidth channels, or may not be spectrally efficient for 
narrowband channels. As it is difficult at this nascent stage of mmW 
development to anticipate the future channel configuration of this 
technology, the Commission is relaxing the emission requirement at the 
channel edge dependent on channel bandwidth, so as to provide for the 
greatest latitude for channel configuration. For the first 10 percent 
of the channel bandwidth from the edge of the licensed block, the 
Commission requires an emission level of -5 dBm/MHz. Beyond the first 
10 percent of the channel bandwidth, the Commission requires an 
emission level of -13 dBm/MHz. These requirements exceed Intel's 
request over the first 10 percent of the channel bandwidth immediately 
outside and adjacent to the licensee's frequency block. The permissible 
out of band power under these emission limits are higher than Nokia and 
Sprint recommendations over the first 10 percent of the channel 
bandwidth, but lower than Samsung's recommendations. Overall, the 
Commission believes these requirements balance the various comments on 
record.
4. Interference Protection and Coordination
a. Coordination and Field Strength Limits at Market Borders
i Base/Mobile Operations
    179. The Commission agrees with the majority of commenters that 
some criteria is necessary at market boundaries to manage interference 
and coordination between adjacent area licensees. The Commission also 
believes that given the wide channel bandwidths and diversity of 
potential applications that might be deployed in these bands, any 
criteria that the Commission adopts should include a scaling factor for 
the bandwidth. Therefore, the Commission will adopt a PFD limit/MHz 
that base operations must meet at the licensee's market boundary, 
absent a mutual agreement between adjacent market licensees to exceed 
that value.
    180. The Commission continues to believe that the 47dBuV/m field 
strength value that the Commission proposed in the NPRM is an 
appropriate basis on which to set a PFD limit for the mmW bands. This 
is the same limit that has been successfully used in the PCS, AWS, and 
BRS bands. However, the Commission notes that a field strength of 
47dBuV/m results in a very conservative absolute power limit because 
field strength does not take into consideration the bandwidth and 
frequency components. Therefore, the Commission believes it is 
appropriate to convert a 47dBuV/m field strength to a PFD limit in 
terms of dBm/m\2\/MHz for the mmW bands. Looking again at the AWS, PCS, 
and BRS bands, the Commission notes that the equivalent PFD based on a 
47dBuV/m field strength is within the range of -76 to -81 dBm/m\2\/MHz 
depending on what bandwidth is assumed. The Commission observes that 
these values bound the -77.6 dBm/m\2\/MHz PFD limit proposed by the 
joint filers. The Commission also recognizes that these values are 
higher than the -86 dBm/m\2\/MHz PFD proposed by Straight Path and the 
-90.3 dBm/m\2\/MHz PFD proposed by Intel. However, the Commission notes 
that Straight Path assumed an interference criteria of -10 dB I/N. In 
recent rulemakings the Commission has assumed an interference criteria 
of 0 dB I/N. Adjusting Straight Path's proposed limit to provide a 0dB 
I/N as opposed to a -10dB I/N yields a market boundary limit of -76 
dBm/m\2\/MHz. The Commission also notes that Intel's

[[Page 79922]]

proposed PFD was based on worst case assumptions about the receive 
antenna gain, citing that the base station would have a gain of 29.1 dB 
in the direction of the interfering source. The Commission believes 
that this assumption is overly conservative. For example, the joint 
filers stated that a lower antenna gain is typically computed in the 
simulation towards the earth station since the receive beam is pointed 
in the direction of the transmitting UE, and it is statistically 
unlikely to coincide with the direction towards the earth station. 
Thus, on balance, the Commission believes that adopting a -77.6 dBm/
m\2\/MHz PFD limit as suggested by the joint filers, will protect 
terrestrial facilities in adjacent market areas from interference in a 
variety of different terrestrial to terrestrial use cases as well as 
the earth station to terrestrial scenario. Therefore, the Commission 
will adopt a market border PFD limit of -77.6 dBm/m\2\/MHz measured at 
1.5 meters above ground. The Commission emphasizes that this level is 
intended to be a coordination trigger and that adjacent licensees are 
free to coordinate mutually agreed upon limits that exceed this value 
along their common market boundaries. The Commission will also reserve 
the right to revisit the market border PFD limit in the future if it 
becomes necessary as technology and services develop in these bands.
ii. Fixed Point-to-Point Operations
    181. The Commission agrees with Skyriver that a field strength 
limit would not be appropriate for fixed point-to-point operations 
because it would require large power reductions by fixed service 
providers. The Commission will retain the existing part 101 technical 
rules for traditional fixed point-to-point links. As such, the 
Commission believes that it is also appropriate to retain the existing 
requirement that fixed point-to-point operations within 16 kilometers 
(in the 38.6-40 GHz band) or 20 kilometers (in the 27.5-28.35 GHz band) 
of a licensee's market boundary must coordinate with co-channel 
licensees in adjacent market areas. With respect to Sprint's suggestion 
that the Commission impose a coordination requirement for adjacent 
channel licensees; in light of the OOBE limits that the Commission 
adopted, the Commission does not believe that any additional 
coordination requirement is necessary for adjacent channel 
operation.\12\ The Commission seeks comment on further refining these 
coordination requirements in the FNPRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The Commission also notes that Sprint's assumption that ULS 
contains current station information is not entirely correct. While 
ULS does contain some information on leased links there is no 
requirement for licensees to report all fixed point-to-point links 
operating under their geographic licenses. Therefore the ULS 
database is an incomplete record of the existing point-to-point 
links.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Canadian and Mexican Borders
    182. In the NPRM, the Commission proposed to adopt a rule for the 
27.5-28.35 GHz, 37-38.6 GHz, and 38.6-40 GHz bands similar to Sec.  
101.147(r)(13), 101.509(d), or 27.57 of the Commission's rules which 
provide that fixed and mobile operations are subject to existing and 
future international agreements with Mexico and Canada. The Commission 
noted that there are existing arrangements for fixed operations in the 
27.5-28.35 GHz and 38.6-40.0 GHz bands between the United States and 
Canada. The Commission also noted that mmW operations must not cause 
harmful interference across any of the Commission's international 
borders. No parties filed comments with respect to this proposal.
    183. Consistent with the Commission's rules for other services, the 
Commission adopted a rule that the 27.5-28.35 GHz, 37-38.6 GHz, and 
38.6-40 GHz bands are subject to existing and future agreements with 
Mexico and Canada.
5. Operability
    184. The Commission adopted its proposal to require operability 
across each millimeter wave band for mobile and transportable 
equipment. The Commission continues believe that interoperability 
delivers important benefits to consumers. While there is significant 
opposition in the record to an interoperability requirement, no 
commenter offered specific reasons why the type of operability proposed 
in the NPRM would be either technically infeasible or harmful as a 
policy matter in these bands. In addition, much of the opposition in 
the record appears to be based on an interpretation of an 
interoperability requirement that the Commission did not propose. The 
Commission therefore concludes that the benefit to consumers outweighs 
the burden to manufacturers in this regard.
    185. Specifically, the Commission requires that any mobile or 
transportable device designed to operate within the 28 GHz band (27.5 
GHz-28.35 GHz) be capable of operating at all frequencies within the 28 
GHz band, on each air interface it uses to operate in the 28 GHz band, 
and similarly that a device operating in the 37 or 39 GHz bands be 
capable of operating at all frequencies within those bands (37 GHz-40 
GHz). For example, a device that uses an LTE air interface to operate 
in a lower frequency band, and a future 5G air interface to operate in 
the 28 GHz band, would be compliant with this requirement if it could 
operate on frequencies from 27.5 GHz to 28.35 GHz using the 5G air 
interface.
    186. For the purposes of this requirement, for the 37 GHz and 39 
GHz bands, a device operating in either band must be capable of 
operating across the entirety of both bands, from 37 GHz to 40 GHz 
(including the 37-37.6 MHz lower block). This requirement will increase 
the market for equipment in these bands, and allow both smaller and 
larger service providers to benefit from economies of scale and 
increased equipment availability. Mandating operability will also 
facilitate shared use of the 37 GHz band by ensuring that a wide 
variety of equipment is available by both Federal agencies and non-
Federal SALs.
    187. The Commission emphasizes that it will not mandate 
compatibility of each device with all possible air interfaces to be 
used in these bands, as some commenters interpreted. Rather, the 
Commission will mandate that with each air interface used by a 
particular device in a millimeter wave band, that device must be 
capable of operating across the entire band. The Commission does not 
adopt any requirement that a device must be capable of utilizing any 
particular standard, technology, or air interface. Additionally, while 
the Commission does not require operability of base or fixed equipment, 
it is its expectation that licensees will work in good faith through 
the standards setting process to develop standards, as technically 
feasible, that support the operation of base and fixed equipment across 
each band.
6. Technical Rules for Part 15 Operation Within the 64-71 GHz Band
    188. The Commission is adopting requirements for unlicensed 
operations in the 64-71 GHz band that are based on the technical 
standards used for the 57-64 GHz band under Sec.  15.255 of the 
Commission's rules. Part 15 of the Commission's regulations permits the 
operation of radio frequency (RF) devices without an individual license 
from the Commission or the need for frequency coordination. The 
technical standards contained in part 15 are designed to ensure that 
there is a low probability that such devices will cause harmful 
interference to other users of the radio spectrum. Except for operating

[[Page 79923]]

on-board aircraft or satellites, and in mobile field disturbance sensor 
applications, any type of unlicensed operation is permitted within the 
57-64 GHz band under Sec.  15.255 of the Commission's rules.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ A field disturbance sensor is defined as ``a device that 
establishes a radio frequency field in its vicinity and detects 
changes in that field resulting from the movement of persons or 
objects within its range.'' 47 CFR 15.3(l). Examples of unlicensed 
field disturbance sensors include radars operating under 47 CFR 
15.252 or 15.256; and perimeter protection systems operating under 
47 CFR 15.209(g) or 15.229.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    189. Suitability of the Existing Rules in Section 15.255 to the 64-
71 GHz Band. In the NPRM, the Commission proposed to apply the existing 
rules in Sec.  15.255 to the 64-71 GHz band with some adjustments, and 
sought comments on certain aspects of the rules to further the growth 
and development of devices without increasing the potential for harmful 
interference to authorized users in the bands. Proponents of unlicensed 
operations unanimously support the proposal to extend the technical 
rules in Sec.  15.255 to cover the entire 57-71 GHz band. Google argues 
that harmonized rules for the frequencies between 57 and 71 GHz will 
allow economies of scale and other efficiencies, thereby facilitating 
rapid and widespread deployment of unlicensed devices; the Wi-Fi 
Alliance confirms that extending part 15 rules to the 64-71 GHz band 
would greatly enhance the capacity of next-generation WiGig 
technologies.'' The Commission finds that the existing technical rules 
in the 57-64 GHz band can successfully apply to the proposed 64-71 GHz 
adjacent band, with certain adjustments, as the Commission examines the 
pertinent rules in detail below.
a. Operation On-Board Aircraft
    190. The Commission is reluctant to allow 60 GHz unlicensed 
operations on-board aircraft in the 57-71 GHz band at the present time. 
In the NPRM, the Commission did not propose to permit unlicensed 
operations on-board aircraft but sought to start the discussion to 
compile a comprehensive record on this subject. The Commission noted, 
there are substantial technical disagreements between the passive 
services licensees and the WiGig industry regarding the attenuation 
provided by aircraft components (e.g., windows and fuselage) and how 
WiGig signals would propagate (e.g., by direct line-of-sight or 
reflections, etc.) and aggregate. The Commission further observes that 
even among the WiGig industry advocates, there is technical 
disagreement. For example, ZII, a wireless inflight entertainment 
services and products provider, opposes on-board aircraft operation of 
WiGig devices in the 64-71 GHz band at the present time due to its 
findings of potential harmful interference to passive services above 63 
GHz despite its financial interest in providing these services. 
Conversely, the Wi-Fi Alliance's analysis found no harmful interference 
to EESS and RAS in the entire 57-71 GHz spectrum. The Commission also 
finds that the studies and technical analyses submitted in the record 
are not persuasive for several reasons. First, the CEPT ECC and ITU 
reports do not address the 60 GHz band, but cover lower frequencies. 
Second, the various link budget analyses from the industry (e.g., from 
ZII and Wi-Fi Alliance) do not show a technical consensus, at least for 
a portion of the proposed 57-71 GHz band, and cast doubt on the 
validity of certain assumptions used to derive these link budgets. 
Third, since the collaboration effort between the WiGig industry and 
NTIA/NSF/JPL (Jet Propulsion Laboratory) has not yet resolved many 
issues, as indicated by NRAO, a decision on the Commission's part at 
this time could prejudge the outcome of that work. Finally, the 
Commission notes that 60 GHz transmitters in mobile devices are only 
just beginning to be marketed, and the impact of their deployment in 
real-world scenarios will require time to be assessed adequately. 
Further, the technology will continue to evolve to address signal 
propagation challenges in the mmW spectrum such that analyses of WiGig 
transmissions on-board aircraft could change substantially once the 
Commission has wide deployments.
    191. The Commission finds that further technical analyses and data 
are necessary before lifting the present operation restriction because 
the record so far did not reflect a clear perspective of the types of 
WiGig applications envisioned on-board aircraft, the priority/order of 
their planned introduction, etc., to provide an adequate assessment of 
their associated potential harmful interference profile as the 
Commission elaborates further in the FNPRM to seek additional 
information on this topic, infra. Specifically, the Commission requests 
sharing studies and data demonstrating that 60 GHz transmitters could 
operate on-board aircraft without causing harmful interference to 
passive sensor services in various types of inflight applications and 
on various types of aircraft.
    192. Finally, the Commission finds that as long as the Commission 
does not permit 60 GHz operations on-board aircraft, the airlines (who 
control the aircraft) would not install access points operating at 60 
GHz on airplanes to provide entertainment/broadband services to WiGig 
user devices. Without the presence of 60 GHz access points, the 
potential for widespread airborne WiGig transmissions is removed. The 
Commission also expects manufacturers/host integrators of WiGig 
transmitters that are incorporated into mobile devices, such as 
laptops, to provide instructions to end users regarding the prohibition 
of operating such transmitters' on-board aircraft, in compliance with 
the Commission's rules as part of the equipment authorization process. 
Consequently, end users will be aware of this rule to avoid device-to-
device transmissions. Based on the above, the Commission is extending 
the restriction on on-board aircraft operation in Sec.  15.255(a)(1) to 
cover the entire 57-71 GHz band.
b. Field Disturbance Sensor Operation
    193. The Commission is reluctant at this time to lift the 
restriction on mobile field disturbance applications in the 60 GHz 
spectrum. At this time, the Commission does not have sufficient 
information about the operation of these mobile field disturbance 
sensors in this spectrum to allow general operation of all mobile field 
disturbance sensors. However, the Commission finds that the narrow 
application of mobile radars in short-range devices for interactive 
motion sensing, such as that described in Google's Project Soli,--where 
a radar is used to detect hand gestures very close to a device to 
control the device without touching it--could be allowed without 
causing harmful interference to other authorized users. As a first 
cautious step, the Commission will not permit these devices to operate 
at the same power levels as 60 GHz communications devices in this 
spectrum, as Google requests, but will allow these short-range devices 
to operate at the same low power levels as those permitted in existing 
fixed field disturbance sensors (i.e., 10 dBm peak EIRP and -10 dBm 
peak transmitter conducted output power, approximately 30 dB below the 
allowable power levels of WiGig communications devices). These power 
levels will ensure that the mobile radars will operate at very short 
distances--such as using hand gestures to control a watch, a 
smartphone's or tablet's screen--which will minimize their harmful 
interference potential. As the Commission acquires more experience with 
these devices, the Commission may consider allowing them higher power 
levels in the future. Accordingly, the Commission is

[[Page 79924]]

amending Sec.  15.255 to permit the operation of short-range devices 
for interactive motion sensing at 10 dBm peak EIRP and -10 dBm peak 
transmitter conducted output power over the entire 57-71 GHz band.
    194. With respect to fixed field disturbance sensors, the 
Commission finds that these devices can continue to operate under the 
technical rules in Sec.  15.255, as they have successfully done over 
the years, and that these rules may be extended to the 64-71 GHz band 
without increasing the potential for harmful interference to 
communication devices in the band. This would result in their wider 
usage in wireless factory automation processes in manufacturing 
facilities, such as those mentioned by Boeing. Accordingly, the 
Commission is amending Sec.  15.255 to allow the operation of fixed 
field disturbance sensors over the entire 57-71 GHz band at the 
existing power limits permitted in the 57-64 GHz band (i.e., 10 dBm 
peak EIRP and -10 dBm peak transmitter conducted output power).
c. Emission Limits
    195. The Commission declines to increase the EIRP limits for low-
power networking indoor and outdoor 60 GHz transmitters by a factor of 
10 as requested by commenters. The Commission notes that the existing 
generous average and peak EIRP limits were adopted based on the very 
high oxygen attenuation in the 57-64 GHz band, which would ensure that 
unlicensed transmitters operating in this band do not cause harmful 
interference to other authorized services. The Commission further notes 
that the Commission proposed the same emission limits for the 64-71 GHz 
band, despite the fact that this band does not exhibit the same 
atmospheric attenuation characteristics, which would enable equipment 
operating in the proposed 64-71 GHz band at the same emission levels to 
effectively provide longer range and higher data throughput. The 
Commission finds that keeping the same emission limits in the absence 
of high oxygen attenuation in the 64-71 GHz band effectively provides 
an increase in power. No additional increase is necessary at this time 
and the Commission is amending the EIRP limits for 60 GHz transmitters 
in Sec.  15.255 to apply across the 57-71 GHz band.
d. Spurious Emissions
    196. The Commission observes that since the Commission first 
adopted part 15 rules for unlicensed operation in the 57-64 GHz band in 
the 1995-2000 time frame, 60 GHz unlicensed transmitters have been 
operating without causing harmful interference to RAS by their harmonic 
signals. This indicates that the Commission's spurious emission limits 
in Sec.  15.255 for transmitters operating in the existing 57-64 GHz 
band are adequate for protecting these passive services. Thus, the 
Commission is concerned with the potential effect of the harmonics of 
fundamental signals in the proposed 64-71 GHz band. The Commission 
observes at the outset that the existing spurious emission limit in 
Sec.  15.255, at 90 pW/cm\2\, is extremely low as compared to the 
spurious limit adopted for other unlicensed transmitters operating in 
comparative spectrum, such as the 76-77 GHz, which, at 600 pW/cm\2\, is 
more than 6 times higher than the spurious limit in Sec.  15.255.
    197. While acknowledging that attenuation effects due to oxygen 
become much less pronounced in the 64-71 GHz band as compared to the 
57-64 GHz band, the Commission finds that interference to RAS stations 
is unlikely for the following reasons. First, RAS receivers 
discriminate against off-axis signals, are generally located in rural 
and remote areas, and radio astronomy observatories typically have 
control over access to a distance of one kilometer from the telescopes 
to provide protection from interference caused by uncontrolled radio 
frequency interference (RFI) sources. Second, the severe propagation 
losses of RF signals in the 64-71 GHz band, their ability to be blocked 
easily by terrain and obstacles, and the typically directional 
emissions of transmitters at these frequencies limit any potential for 
interference from fundamental emissions to a short distance (e.g., 100-
200 meters). Third, spurious and harmonic emissions generally roll off 
(i.e., reduce in amplitude) the further they are in frequency from the 
fundamental emission; therefore, if fundamental emissions are severely 
attenuated, harmonics would be affected proportionally. Based on all 
these factors, the Commission finds that spurious and harmonic 
emissions of 57-71 GHz unlicensed transmitters at the very low limit of 
90 pW/cm\2\ in Sec.  15.255 would not cause harmful interference to RAS 
operations. Accordingly, the Commission is amending the spurious 
emission rule in Sec.  15.255 to apply across the 57-71 GHz band.
e. Publicly-Accessible Coordination Channel
    198. Section 15.255(d) sets aside a publicly-accessible 
coordination channel in the 57.00-57.05 GHz band, in which only 
spurious emissions and emissions related to coordination techniques 
regarding interference management between diverse, non-interoperable, 
transmitters are permitted. The Commission observed in the NPRM that 
with recent technological advances and industry standardization, co-
existence between 60 GHz devices is better resolved by voluntary 
standards than by a coordination channel requirement in the rules, and 
proposed to remove this requirement. Commenters unanimously agree with 
the Commission's assessment and support the elimination of this 
requirement to free a 50-megahertz swath of spectrum for communications 
usage. Accordingly, the Commission is removing the requirement for a 
publicly-accessible coordination channel from Sec.  15.255.
f. Conducted Transmitter Output Power
    199. Section 15.255(e) limits the peak transmitter conducted output 
power of 57-64 GHz unlicensed devices to 500 mW (i.e., 27 dBm) for 
transmitters with an emission bandwidth of at least 100 MHz, and is 
reduced for systems that employ narrower bandwidths.
    200. The Commission declines to remove this requirement. The reason 
for limiting the peak transmitter conducted output power while allowing 
very high EIRP limits (in this case, 40 dBm (10W) average/43 dBm (20W) 
peak) for an unlicensed transmitter is to ensure that the transmitter 
antenna beamwidth is kept sufficiently narrow to avoid causing harmful 
interference to other users in the band and to minimize the risk of RF 
exposure to humans. Accordingly, the Commission denies NCTA's request 
and amend the peak transmitter conducted output power requirement in 
Sec.  15.255 to apply across the 57-71 GHz band.
g. Frequency Stability
    201. Section 15.255(f) requires that fundamental emissions be 
contained within the 57-64 GHz frequency band during all conditions of 
operation; and that equipment be able to operate over the temperature 
range -20 to +50 degrees Celsius with an input voltage variation of 85% 
to 115% of rated input voltage. In the NPRM, the Commission proposed to 
apply the same requirements to transmitters operating in the 64-71 GHz 
band. No party objects to this proposal. Accordingly, the Commission is 
amending Sec.  15.255 to apply across the 57-71 GHz band.
h. Co-Location of Separately-Authorized Transmitters
    202. Section 15.255(h) allows group installation of transmitters 
that have

[[Page 79925]]

been tested separately for compliance with the rules and received 
separate equipment authorizations, as long as no transmitter in the 
group is equipped with external phase-locking inputs that permit beam-
forming arrays to be realized. In the NPRM, the Commission indicated 
that this requirement seeks to prevent the possibility of producing a 
high-power coherent beam from discrete transmitters that have not been 
tested for compliance together. This could lead to non-compliance with 
the emission limits but it does not preclude the use of advanced 
antenna technologies with beam-forming arrays in any transmitter, as 
long as the emissions in any array configuration comply with the 
emission and RF exposure limits. The Commission proposed to apply the 
same requirement to equipment operating in the 64-71 GHz band. No party 
objects to this proposal. Accordingly, the Commission is amending Sec.  
15.255 to apply across the 57-71 GHz band.
7. Equipment Authorization
    203. The OET was delegated authority by the Commission to 
administer the equipment authorization program for RF devices under 
part 2 of its rules. All RF devices subject to equipment authorization 
must comply with the Commission's rules prior to importation or 
marketing, by being tested for compliance with the applicable technical 
requirements, using measurement procedures that either follow guidance 
issued by OET through its KDB publications, or have been found to be 
acceptable to the Commission in accordance with Sec.  2.947 of the 
rules.
a. Measurement Techniques
    204. In the NPRM, the Commission recognized that there are some 
unique technical challenges specific to demonstrating compliance for 
the purpose of equipment authorization of millimeter wave devices. The 
Commission sought comments on a variety of challenges involved with 
measurements of in-band, out-of-band and spurious emissions. As 
discussed, supra, a number of parties discuss the measurement 
challenges concerning emission limit metrics. For example, certain 
parties oppose using EIRP as the metric for measuring OOBE limits, 
proposing instead a different metric using TRP, claiming consistency 
with recent academic research for multiple-input, multiple-output 
(MIMO) antenna arrays. However, TRP is not presently part of the 
Commission's measurement procedure guidance for devices using MIMO 
antennas. Commenters recommend that the Commission continue to provide 
guidance on acceptable new measurement procedures via OET's KDB 
publications. Commenters also recognize that 5G technology is in the 
early stages of equipment design and development so it is difficult at 
this point in time to identify all of the potential compliance and 
measurement challenges.
    205. The Commission finds that the mmW technology will continue to 
evolve to address various technical challenges in this spectrum (with 
respect to propagation, interference protection, modulation techniques, 
transmission security, etc.), and pending new measurement equipment 
availability to cover the entire mmW spectrum that the Commission is 
making available for the next generation of wireless services herein, 
mmW measurement procedures are best developed by OET with the 
participation of interested parties. The Commission expects that OET 
will provide guidance on various acceptable measurement techniques for 
mmW devices through its KDB publications as products are developed.
b. RF Exposure Compliance
    206. (RF) exposure compliance is an ongoing requirement for all 
transmitters authorized by the Commission. In the NPRM, the Commission 
proposed to similarly require compliance with the Commission's general 
RF exposure limits in Sec. Sec.  1.1307(b), 2.1091 and 2.1093 of the 
rules for equipment operating in the UMFUS. While the Commission sought 
comment on this proposal alongside some of the other relevant technical 
challenges unique to compliance demonstration for devices envisaged to 
be operating under the UMFUS, the Commission acknowledged in the NPRM 
that any issues raised involving the present exposure limits themselves 
would be considered in the context of the Commission's separate 
proceeding on this particular issue.
    207. With respect to the rules specific to UMFUS in part 30 of the 
Commission's rules, the Commission adopts the paragraph the Commission 
proposed in the NPRM that requires compliance with the Commission's 
general RF exposure limits in Sec. Sec.  1.1307(b), 2.1091 and 2.1093 
of the rules. The comments from industry advocate adopting alternative 
exposure limits, which the Commission continues to view as beyond the 
scope of this proceeding, and that will be considered in a separate 
proceeding. The Commission is not changing its fundamental exposure 
limits at this time in light of the devices to be expected under the 
UMFUS rules. More specifically, the Commission is not modifying its 
specified SAR values as a primary exposure limit between 100 kHz and 6 
GHz, and the Commission will continue to use the specified MPE power 
density limit as a primary exposure limit above 6 GHz.
    208. The Commission recognizes that there is a discontinuity at 6 
GHz resulting from the fact that the Commission's rules do not specify 
a spatial averaging area (an area over which to average power density) 
or a spatial peak power density above 6 GHz that is consistent with the 
Commission's localized (over 1 gram) specific absorption rate (SAR) 
below 6 GHz. At lower frequencies for sources at least 20 cm from the 
body, spatial averaging over the entire body has been acceptable. 
However, both IEEE and International Commission on Non-Ionizing 
Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) have recognized that at higher 
frequencies spatial averaging areas need to be smaller. Of these 
specifications, the smaller and more conservative area is by ICNIRP, 
which has specified a spatial averaging area of 20 cm\2\ above 10 GHz. 
While the Commission notes this as an apparently reasonable requirement 
the Commission is not suggesting any particular changes to the 
Commission's evaluation procedures at this time. The Commission will 
separately consider the broader questions of the RF exposure limits and 
how they should be applied in the Commission's RF Inquiry. In the 
meantime, as the Commission acknowledged in the NPRM, specific guidance 
on evaluating devices operating in this service will be issued by OET, 
and it is consistent with the Commission's existing discussions on 
spatial averaging to further clarify guidance on an area over which to 
average power density in the Commission's KDB publications through that 
process. Finally, the Commission acknowledges the variations between 
standards pointed out by the MMF and encourage further efforts on the 
specific issue of localized millimeter wave exposure by the standards 
setting bodies and the broader research community.
H. Other Allocation Issues
    209. The Commission deletes the broadcasting and broadcasting-
satellite service allocations from the 42 GHz band to better protect 
the radio astronomy observations of the 42.5-43.5 GHz band from out-of-
band emissions. Further, the ubiquitous nature of the BSS and the 
broadcasting service would likely interfere with ubiquitous mobile 
deployment in similar ways to a ubiquitous fixed service deployment. As

[[Page 79926]]

previously noted, the BSS also poses an interference risk to adjacent 
RAS services. Nevertheless, the BSS will still retain 1.5 gigahertz of 
spectrum in the 40.5-42 GHz band for its future operations.
    210. The Commission also declines to adopt its proposal to allocate 
the 42 GHz band for FSS downlink operations. Given the Commission's 
decision to grant FSS enhanced access to the 37.5-40 GHz band, and the 
fact that FSS has access to the 40.5-42 GHz band, the Commission find 
there is less reason to further expand FSS operations to the 42 GHz 
band. The Commission believes there is value in potentially having an 
UMFUS band available for exclusive terrestrial use, and the Commission 
addresses this issue in the companion FNPRM.

II. Procedural Matters

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    211. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as 
amended (RFA), the Commission incorporated an 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 the NPRM. No comments were filed addressing the IRFA. 
Because the Commission amends the rules in this Report and Order, the 
Commission has included this Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 
(FRFA) which conforms to the RFA.
1. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules
    212. In the attached Report and Order, the Commission increases the 
Nation's supply of spectrum for mobile broadband by adopting rules for 
fixed and mobile services in the 27.5-28.35 GHz band (28 GHz band), the 
38.6-40 GHz band (39 GHz band), and the 37-38.6 GHz band (37 GHz band). 
The Commission also authorizes unlicensed operation pursuant to part 15 
of its rules in the 64-71 GHz band. These bands are known collectively 
as the ``mmW bands.''
    213. Until recently, the mmW bands were generally considered 
unsuitable for mobile applications because of propagation losses at 
such high frequencies and the inability of mmW signals to propagate 
around obstacles. As increasing congestion has begun to fill the lower 
bands and carriers have resorted to smaller and smaller microcells in 
order to re-use the available spectrum, however, industry is taking 
another look at the mmW bands and beginning to realize that at least 
some of its presumed disadvantages can be turned to advantage. For 
example, short transmission paths and high propagation losses can 
facilitate spectrum re-use in microcellular deployments by limiting the 
amount of interference between adjacent cells. Furthermore, where 
longer paths are desired, the extremely short wavelengths of mmW 
signals make it feasible for very small antennas to concentrate signals 
into highly focused beams with enough gain to overcome propagation 
losses. The short wavelengths of mmW signals also make it possible to 
build multi-element, dynamic beam-forming antennas that will be small 
enough to fit into handsets--a feat that might never be possible at the 
lower, longer-wavelength frequencies below 6 GHz where cell phones 
operate today.
    214. In the 28 GHz, 39 GHz, and 37 GHz bands, the Commission 
creates a new radio service in a new rule part that will authorize 
fixed and mobile services--the part 30 Upper Microwave Flexible Use 
Service. This additional spectrum for mobile use will help ensure that 
the speed, capacity, and ubiquity of the nation's wireless networks 
keeps pace with the skyrocketing demand for mobile service. It will 
also make possible new types of services for consumers and businesses.
    215. The service rules the Commission adopted make additional 
spectrum available for flexible use. In creating service rules for 
these bands, which include technical rules to protect against harmful 
interference, licensing rules to establish geographic license areas and 
spectrum block sizes, and performance requirements to promote robust 
buildout, the Commission advances toward enabling rapid and efficient 
deployment. The Commission does so by providing flexible service, 
technical, assignment, and licensing rules for this spectrum, except 
where special provisions are necessary to facilitate shared use with 
other co-primary users.
    216. For the 28 GHz 37 GHz, and 39 GHz bands, the Commission 
proposes to assign licenses by competitive bidding using counties as 
the area for geographic area licensing in the 28 GHz band and in a 
portion of 37 GHz band (37-37.6 GHz). The Commission will award PEA-
based licenses by competitive bidding for the 39 GHz and the upper 
portion of the 37 GHz band (37.6-38.6 GHz). In the 37-37.6 GHz band, 
the Commission has created a 600 MHz shared access space with rule-
based, non-interfering Shared Access Licenses (SALs) which will share 
the band with Federal fixed and mobile operations. SAL licensees are 
not guaranteed spectrum access or interference protection from 
individual licensees. The Commission believes this system at 37 GHz 
will create an innovative shared space that can be used by a wide 
variety of Federal and non-Federal users, by new entrants and by 
established operators--and small businesses in particular--to 
experiment with new technologies in the mmW space and innovate.
    217. At the same time, because the 28 GHz, 39 GHz, and 37 GHz bands 
are shared with satellite services, the Commission has taken steps to 
facilitate sharing with satellite uses in ways that are consistent with 
fixed and mobile use of the bands. Specifically, the Commission 
concludes the Commission will authorize a limited number of satellite 
earth stations to operate on a co-primary basis--one in each county for 
the 28 GHz band and one in each PEA in the 37.5-40 GHz band--on a 
first-come, first-served basis. In the 28 GHz band the Commission will 
grandfather pre-existing satellite earth stations in any county into a 
local interference zone with the right to operate under the terms of 
their existing authorizations. These FSS earth stations must comply 
with certain enumerated conditions to obtain an authorization for their 
specific locations, including coordinating their operations with any 
existing mmW licensees to ensure non-interference between the services. 
Additional earth stations can be located if the FSS operator acquires a 
part 30 license, reaches a contractual agreement with the part 30 
licensee, or agrees to operate on a secondary basis.
    218. Overall, the new provisions the Commission is adopting are 
designed to allow licensees to choose their type of service offerings, 
to encourage innovation and investment in mobile and fixed use in this 
spectrum, and to provide a stable regulatory environment in which 
fixed, mobile, and satellite deployment will be able to develop through 
the application of flexible rules. The market-oriented licensing 
framework for these bands will ensure that this spectrum is efficiently 
utilized and will foster the development of new and innovative 
technologies and services, as well as encourage the growth and 
development of a wide variety of services, ultimately leading to 
greater benefits to consumers.
2. Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response 
to the IRFA
    219. No comments were filed in direct response to the IRFA.

[[Page 79927]]

3. Response to Comments by the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 
Business Administration
    220. Pursuant to the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010, which amended 
the RFA, the Commission is required to respond to any comments filed by 
the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration 
(SBA), and to provide a detailed statement of any change made to the 
proposed rules as a result of those comments. The Chief Counsel did not 
file any comments in response to the proposed rules in this proceeding.
4. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which 
the Proposed Rules Will Apply
    221. 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.
    222. Small Businesses, Small Organizations, and Small Governmental 
Jurisdictions. The Commission's action may, over time, affect small 
entities that are not easily categorized at present. The Commission 
therefore describes here, at the outset, three comprehensive, statutory 
small entity size standards. First, nationwide, there are a total of 
approximately 28.2 million businesses, 99.7 percent of which are small, 
according to the SBA. In addition, a ``small organization'' is 
generally ``any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned 
and operated and is not dominant in its field.'' Nationwide, as of 
2007, there were approximately 1,621,315 small organizations. Finally, 
the term ``small governmental jurisdiction'' is defined generally as 
``governments of cities, towns, townships, villages, school districts, 
or special districts, with a population of less than fifty thousand.'' 
Census Bureau data for 2011 indicate that there were 89,476 local 
governmental jurisdictions in the United States. The Commission 
estimates that, of this total, as many as 88,506 entities may qualify 
as ``small governmental jurisdictions.'' Thus, the Commission estimates 
that most governmental jurisdictions are small.
    223. Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except satellite). The 
appropriate size standard under SBA rules is for the category Wireless 
Telecommunications Carriers. Under that size standard, such a business 
is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. Census Bureau data for 
2012, show that there were 967 firms in this category that operated for 
the entire year. Of this total, 955 had employment of 999 or fewer, and 
12 firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more. Thus under this 
category and the associated small business size standard, the 
Commission estimates that the majority of wireless telecommunications 
carriers (except satellite) are small entities that may be affected by 
the Commission's action.
    224. Fixed Microwave Services. Microwave services include common 
carrier, private-operational fixed, and broadcast auxiliary radio 
services. They also include the Local Multipoint Distribution Service 
(LMDS), the Digital Electronic Message Service (DEMS), the 39 GHz 
Service (39 GHz), the 24 GHz Service, and the Millimeter Wave Service 
where licensees can choose between common carrier and non-common 
carrier status. At present, there are approximately 61,970 common 
carrier fixed licensees, 62,909 private and public safety operational-
fixed licensees, 20,349 broadcast auxiliary radio licensees, 412 LMDS 
licenses, 35 DEMS licenses, 870 39 GHz licenses, and five 24 GHz 
licenses, and 408 Millimeter Wave licenses in the microwave services. 
The Commission has not yet defined a small business with respect to 
microwave services. For purposes of the FRFA, the Commission will use 
the SBA's definition applicable to Wireless Telecommunications Carriers 
(except satellite)--i.e., an entity with no more than 1,500 persons is 
considered small. Under that size standard, such a business is small if 
it has 1,500 or fewer employees. Census Bureau data for 2012, show that 
there were 967 firms in this category that operated for the entire 
year. Of this total, 955 had employment of 999 or fewer, and 12 firms 
had employment of 1,000 employees or more. Thus under this category and 
the associated small business size standard, the Commission estimates 
that the majority of wireless telecommunications carriers (except 
satellite) are small entities that may be affected by the Commission's 
proposed action. The Commission notes that the number of firms does not 
necessarily track the number of licensees. The Commission estimates 
that virtually all of the Fixed Microwave licensees (excluding 
broadcast auxiliary licensees) would qualify as small entities under 
the SBA definition.
    225. Satellite Telecommunications and All Other Telecommunications. 
Two economic census categories address the satellite industry. The 
first category has a small business size standard of $32.5 million or 
less in average annual receipts, under SBA rules. The second also has a 
size standard of $32.5 million or less in annual receipts.
    226. The category of Satellite Telecommunications ``comprises 
establishments primarily engaged in providing telecommunications 
services to other establishments in the telecommunications and 
broadcasting industries by forwarding and receiving communications 
signals via a system of satellites or reselling satellite 
telecommunications.'' Census Bureau data for 2012 show that 333 
Satellite Telecommunications firms operated for that entire year. Of 
this total, 275 firms had annual receipts of under $10 million, and 58 
firms had receipts of $10 million to $24,999,999. Consequently, the 
Commission estimates that the majority of Satellite Telecommunications 
firms are small entities that might be affected by the Commission's 
action.
    227. The second category, i.e., ``All Other Telecommunications,'' 
comprises ``establishments primarily engaged in providing specialized 
telecommunications services, such as satellite tracking, communications 
telemetry, and radar station operation. This industry also includes 
establishments primarily engaged in providing satellite terminal 
stations and associated facilities connected with one or more 
terrestrial systems and capable of transmitting telecommunications to, 
and receiving telecommunications from, satellite systems. 
Establishments providing Internet services or voice over Internet 
protocol (VoIP) services via client-supplied telecommunications 
connections are also included in this industry.'' For this category, 
Census Bureau data for 2012 show that there were a total of 1442 firms 
that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 1400 firms had annual 
receipts of under $25 million, and 42 firms had annual receipts of $25 
million to $49, 999,999. Consequently, the Commission estimates that 
the majority of All Other Telecommunications firms are small entities 
that might be affected by the Commission's action.
    228. Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications 
Equipment

[[Page 79928]]

Manufacturing. The proposed rules relating to part 15 operation pertain 
to manufacturers of unlicensed communications devices. The Census 
Bureau defines this category as follows: ``This industry comprises 
establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing radio and television 
broadcast and wireless communications equipment. Examples of products 
made by these establishments are: Transmitting and receiving antennas, 
cable television equipment, GPS equipment, pagers, cellular phones, 
mobile communications equipment, and radio and television studio and 
broadcasting equipment.'' The SBA has developed a small business size 
standard for firms in this category, which is: All such firms having 
750 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 2007, there 
were a total of 939 establishments in this category that operated for 
part or all of the entire year. Of this total, 784 had less than 500 
employees and 155 had more than 100 employees. Thus, under this size 
standard, the majority of firms can be considered small.
5. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other 
Compliance Requirements
    229. The projected reporting, recordkeeping, and other compliance 
requirements proposed in the Report and Order will apply to all 
entities in the same manner. The revisions the Commission adopts should 
benefit small entities by giving them more information, more 
flexibility, and more options for gaining access to wireless spectrum.
    230. Any applicants for Upper Microwave Flexible Use Service 
licenses will be required to file license applications using the 
Commission's automated Universal Licensing System (ULS). ULS is an 
online electronic filing system that also serves as a powerful 
information tool, one that enables potential licensees to research 
applications, licenses, and antenna structures. It also keeps the 
public informed with weekly public notices, FCC rulemakings, processing 
utilities, and a telecommunications glossary. Upper Microwave Flexible 
Use Service applicants that must submit long-form license applications 
must do so through ULS using Form 601, FCC Ownership Disclosure 
Information for the Wireless Telecommunications Services using FCC Form 
602, and other appropriate forms.
    231. Licensees in the Upper Microwave Flexible Use Service will be 
subject to performance requirements based on a series of metrics, 
tailored to each type of service a licensee may offer. Accordingly, 
mobile services will be required to provide service to 40 percent of 
the population of their license area by the end of their initial 
license terms. Geographic area licensees providing Fixed Service in the 
28 GHz, 37 GHz and 39 GHz will be required to construct and operate at 
least 15 links per million persons in the population. Satellite 
operators will be able to meet their build-out requirement by deploying 
an operational earth station in the license area that provides service. 
Licensees deploying a mix of such services will be able to choose which 
performance metric--or combination thereof--they desire to meet. 
Performance will be assessed on a license area basis, regardless of 
license area size. For the 28 GHz band, licenses will terminate 
automatically if a licensee fails to meet the applicable performance 
requirements. For geographic area licenses in the 37 and 39 GHz bands, 
licensees will have the option of partitioning their licenses on a 
county basis to come into compliance with the relevant performance 
metric. Licensees will be required to provide information to the 
Commission on the facilities they have constructed, the nature of the 
service they are providing, and the extent to which they are providing 
coverage in their license area, to both facilitate sharing with other 
authorized services and to enable accurate assessment of their 
performance. Incumbent licensees will be granted time to transition to 
these new performance requirements. FSS operators will have to 
coordinate their operations with any existing mmW licensees to ensure 
non-interference between the services.
    232. New licensees will also be required, within three years after 
receiving their licenses but no later than six months prior to 
deployment, to file with the Commission a security statement signed by 
a senior licensee executive with personal knowledge of the licensee's 
security plans and practice, which must include, at a minimum, the 
following elements: (1) A high-level, general description of the 
licensee's security approach designed to safeguard the planned 
network's confidentiality, integrity, and availability with respect to 
communications from: A device to the licensee's network; one element of 
the licensee's network to another element on the licensee's network; 
the licensee's network to another network; and device to device (with 
respect to telephone voice and messaging services); (2) a high-level, 
general description of the licensee's approach to assessing and 
mitigating cyber risk induced by the presence of multiple participants 
in the band. This should include the high level approach taken toward 
ensuring consumer network confidentiality, integrity, and availability 
security principles, which are to be protected in each of the following 
use cases: Communications between a wireless device and the licensee's 
network; communications within and between each licensee's network; 
communications between mobile devices that are under end-to-end control 
of the licensee; and communications between mobile devices that are not 
under the end-to-end control of the licensee; (3) a high-level 
description of relevant cybersecurity standards and practices to be 
employed, whether industry-recognized or related to some other 
identifiable approach; (4) a description of the extent to which the 
licensee participates with standards bodies or industry-led 
organizations pursuing the development or maintenance of emerging 
security standards and/or best practices; (5) the high-level 
identification of any other approaches to security, unique to the 
services and devices the licensee intends to offer and deploy; and (6) 
plans to incorporate relevant outputs from Information Sharing and 
Analysis Organizations (ISAOs) as elements of the licensee's security 
architecture. Plans should include comment on machine-to-machine threat 
information sharing.
    233. All of the filing, recordkeeping and reporting requirements 
associated with the demands described above, including professional, 
accounting, engineering or survey services used in meeting these 
requirements will be the same for large and small businesses that 
intend to utilize these new UMFUS licenses, but as described below, 
several steps have been taken that will alleviate burdens on small 
businesses in particular.
6. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small 
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered
    234. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant 
alternative that it has considered in reaching 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 or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities; 
(3) the

[[Page 79929]]

use of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) an exemption 
from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small entities.
    235. As noted above, the various construction and performance 
requirements and their associated showings will be the same for large 
and small businesses that license the Upper Microwave Flexible Use 
Service bands. To the extent the same cost of complying with these 
burdens is relatively greater for smaller businesses than for large 
ones, these costs are necessary to effectuate the purpose of the 
Communications Act, namely to further the efficient use of spectrum and 
to prevent spectrum warehousing. Likewise compliance with the 
Commission's service and technical rules and coordination requirements 
are necessary for the furtherance of the Commission's goals of 
protecting the public while also providing interference free services. 
Large and small businesses must therefore comply with these rules and 
requirements, but the Commission has taken steps to alleviate the 
burden on small businesses that seek to comply with these requirements, 
as discussed below.
    236. The Report and Order provides that in the 28 GHz, 37 GHz and 
39 GHz bands, mmW licensees will have the flexibility to provide any 
fixed or mobile service that is consistent with their spectrum 
allocation. This breaks with the recent past in which licensees were 
limited to only single use licenses in these bands, and such new 
flexibility benefits small businesses by giving them more avenues for 
gaining access to valuable wireless spectrum. In addition, licensees 
will be able to make a showing based on a combination of fixed and 
mobile service, simplifying this process for all licensees including 
small businesses. The Commission has also extended the existing renewal 
deadlines for incumbent licensees in the 28 and 39 GHz bands, giving 
these licensees, including small businesses in these bands, additional 
time until 2024 to meet the performance requirements pertaining to 
their current licenses.
    237. Furthermore, the license areas chosen in the Report and Order 
should provide spectrum access opportunities for smaller carriers by 
giving them access to less densely populated areas that match their 
footprints. For example, the Report and Order transitions the 28 GHz 
band from being licensed on the BTA basis to a much smaller license 
area--counties. Similarly, the Commission transitions the 39 GHz band 
from being licensed via Economic Areas (``EAs'') to the smaller Partial 
Economic Areas (``PEAs''). The Commission also uses PEAs for the 37 GHz 
band, which will be newly licensed. The Commission abandons its 
proposed ``hybrid licensing scheme'' in the 37 GHz band and has instead 
opted to use geographic area licensing with PEAs in the upper 37.6-38.6 
GHz portion with county-based licensing in the lower band (37.0-37.6 
GHz). Finally, the Commission has created an unlicensed space in the 
64-71 GHz band. However, the Report and Order also permits partitioning 
and disaggregation by licensees in the mmW bands. While PEAs and 
counties are small enough to provide spectrum access opportunities for 
smaller carriers and PEAs could even be further disaggregated, these 
units of area also nest within and may be aggregated to form larger 
license areas. Therefore, the benefits and burdens resulting from 
assigning spectrum in PEA and county license areas are equivalent for 
small and large businesses. The 400 MHz shared space the Commission has 
created in the lower 37 GHz band (37.0-37.6 GHz) should also provide 
ease-of-entry and plenty of space for opportunistic and innovative uses 
that could be developed by small businesses. These rules should enable 
providers, or any entities large or small providing service in the mmW 
bands, to more easily adjust their spectrum holdings and build their 
networks pursuant to individual business plans. The Commission believes 
this should result in small businesses having an easier time acquiring 
or accessing spectrum.
    238. Licensees may also adjust their geographic coverage through 
auction in those areas where the Commission is permitting geographic 
area auctions or through the secondary markets. The Report and Order 
concludes it will auction licenses in the mmW bands 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 
competitive bidding procedures that have been employed in previous 
auctions. The procedures the Commission has adopted contain provisions 
to assist small entities in competitive bidding. The Commission will 
employ the part 1 rules governing competitive bidding design, 
designated entity preferences, unjust enrichment, application and 
payment procedures, reporting requirements, and the prohibition on 
certain communications between auction applicants. Furthermore, 
qualifying ``small businesses''--those with gross revenues for the 
preceding three years not exceeding $55 million--will be provided with 
a bidding credit of 15 percent, and ``very small businesses''--those 
with average annual gross revenues for the preceding three years not 
exceeding $20 million--with a bidding credit of 25 percent. Providing 
small businesses and very small businesses with bidding credits will 
provide an economic benefit to small entities by making it easier for 
small entities to acquire spectrum or access to spectrum in these 
bands.
    239. Furthermore, the Report and Order provides for licensing of 
this spectrum under market-oriented rules. This includes applying the 
Commission's secondary market policies and rules to all transactions 
involving the use of mmW bands, which will provide greater 
predictability and regulatory parity with bands licensed for mobile 
broadband service. These rules should make it easier for mmW providers 
to enter secondary market arrangements involving use of their spectrum. 
The secondary market rules apply equally to all entities, whether small 
or large. As a result, the Commission believes that this will provide 
an economic benefit to small entities by making it easier for entities, 
whether large or small, to enter into secondary market arrangements for 
mmW spectrum.
    240. The Report and Order also adopts an operability requirement 
such that any device designed to operate within the 37 GHz and 39 GHz 
bands (37-40 GHz) must be capable of operating on all frequencies 
within those bands. This operability requirement will ensure that 
devices developed for the geographic area licensed portion of the band 
will also operate in the innovation shared space, making it easier for 
smaller businesses with fewer resources to find equipment that can 
operate across multiple bands. The technical rules in the Report and 
Order will also allow licensees of the mmW spectrum to operate while 
protecting licensees in nearby spectrum from harmful interference, some 
of whom may be small entities.
    241. Finally, the proposals to facilitate satellite service in the 
28 GHz and 37.5-40 GHz bands should also assist small satellite 
businesses.
7. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the 
Proposed Rules
    242. None.

J. Ordering Clauses

    243. Accordingly, it is ordered, pursuant to Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 
5, 7, 10, 201, 225, 227, 301, 302, 302a, 303, 304, 307, 309, 310, 316, 
319, 332, and 336 of

[[Page 79930]]

the Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 157, 
160, 201, 225, 227, 301, 302, 302a, 303, 304, 307, 309, 310, 316, 319, 
332, 336, Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, as 
amended, 47 U.S.C. 1302, and Sec.  1.411 of the Commission's Rules, 47 
CFR 1.411, that this Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking is hereby adopted.
    244. 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 Report and Order and Further Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking, including the Final and Initial Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 
Business Administration.
    245. It is further ordered that the petition for rulemaking filed 
by the Fixed Wireless Communications Coalition (RM-11664) is denied 
with respect to the 42-42.5 GHz band.
    246. It is further ordered that the Commission shall send a copy of 
this Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to 
Congress and the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the 
Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Parts 1, 2, 15, 25, 30 and 101

    Communications common carriers, Communications equipment, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

Final Rules

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission amends 47 CFR parts 1, 2, 15, 25, 30 and 101 
as follows:

PART 1--PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

0
1. The authority citation for part 1 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority:  47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 155, 157, 160, 201, 
225, 227, 303, 309, 332, 1403, 1404, 1451, 1452, and 1455.


0
2. Section 1.907 is amended by revising the definitions for ``Wireless 
Radio Services'' and ``Wireless Telecommunications Services'' to read 
as follows:


Sec.  1.907  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Wireless Radio Services. All radio services authorized in parts 13, 
20, 22, 24, 26, 27, 30, 74, 80, 87, 90, 95, 96, 97 and 101 of this 
chapter, whether commercial or private in nature.
    Wireless Telecommunications Services. Wireless Radio Services, 
whether fixed or mobile, that meet the definition of 
``telecommunications service'' as defined by 47 U.S.C. 153, as amended, 
and are therefore subject to regulation on a common carrier basis. 
Wireless Telecommunications Services include all radio services 
authorized by parts 20, 22, 24, 26, 27, and 30 of this chapter. In 
addition, Wireless Telecommunications Services include Public Coast 
Stations authorized by part 80 of this chapter, Commercial Mobile Radio 
Services authorized by part 90 of this chapter, common carrier fixed 
microwave services, Local Television Transmission Service (LTTS), Local 
Multipoint Distribution Service (LMDS), and Digital Electronic Message 
Service (DEMS), authorized by part 101 of this chapter, and Citizens 
Broadband Radio Services authorized by part 96 of this chapter.

0
3. Section 1.1307 is amended by adding an entry for ``Upper Microwave 
Flexible Use Service (part 30)'' above the entry for ``Radio Broadcast 
Services (part 73)'' in Table 1 in paragraph (b)(1) and revising 
paragraph (b)(2)(i) to read as follows:


Sec.  1.1307  Actions that may have a significant environmental effect, 
for which Environmental Assessments (EAs) must be prepared.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *

   Table 1--Transmitters, Facilities and Operations Subject to Routine
                        Environmental Evaluation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Service (title 47 CFR rule part)          Evaluation required if:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                              * * * * * * *
Upper Microwave Flexible Use        Non-building-mounted antennas:
 Service (part 30).                  Height above ground level to lowest
                                     point of antenna <10 m and power
                                     >1640 W EIRP.
                                    Antennas are mounted on buildings.
 
                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2)(i) Mobile and portable transmitting devices that operate in the 
Commercial Mobile Radio Services pursuant to part 20 of this chapter; 
the Cellular Radiotelephone Service pursuant to part 22 of this 
chapter; the Personal Communications Services (PCS) pursuant to part 24 
of this chapter; the Satellite Communications Services pursuant to part 
25 of this chapter; the Miscellaneous Wireless Communications Services 
pursuant to part 27 of this chapter; the Upper Microwave Flexible Use 
Service pursuant to part 30 of this chapter; the Maritime Services 
(ship earth stations only) pursuant to part 80 of this chapter; the 
Specialized Mobile Radio Service, the 4.9 GHz Band Service, or the 3650 
MHz Wireless Broadband Service pursuant to part 90 of this chapter; the 
Wireless Medical Telemetry Service (WMTS), or the Medical Device 
Radiocommunication Service (MedRadio) pursuant to part 95 of this 
chapter; or the Citizens Broadband Radio Service pursuant to part 96 of 
this chapter are subject to routine environmental evaluation for RF 
exposure prior to equipment authorization or use, as specified in 
Sec. Sec.  2.1091 and 2.1093 of this chapter.
* * * * *

0
4. Section 1.9001 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  1.9001  Purpose and scope.

    (a) The purpose of part 1, subpart X is to implement policies and 
rules pertaining to spectrum leasing arrangements between licensees in 
the services identified in this subpart and spectrum lessees. This 
subpart also implements policies for private commons arrangements. 
These policies and rules also implicate other Commission rule parts, 
including parts 1, 2, 20, 22, 24, 25, 27, 30, 80, 90, 95,

[[Page 79931]]

and 101 of title 47, chapter I of the Code of Federal Regulations.
* * * * *

0
5. Section 1.9005 is amended by revising paragraphs (hh) through (kk) 
and adding paragraph (ll) to read as follows:


Sec.  1.9005  Included services.

* * * * *
    (hh) The Multipoint Video Distribution and Data Service (part 101 
of this chapter);
    (ii) The 700 MHz Guard Bands Service (part 27 of this chapter);
    (jj) The ATC of a Mobile Satellite Service (part 25 of this 
chapter);
    (kk) The 600 MHz band (part 27 of this chapter); and
    (ll) The Upper Microwave Flexible Use Service (part 30 of this 
chapter).

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

0
6. The authority citation for part 2 continues to read as follows:

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

0
7. Section 2.106 is amended as follows:
0
a. Pages 55, 57, 58, and 61 are revised.
0
b. In the list of United States (US) Footnotes, footnote US151 is 
added.
0
c. In the list of Non-Federal Government (NG) Footnotes, footnote NG63 
is added.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:


Sec.  2.106  Table of Frequency Allocations.

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

[[Page 79932]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR14NO16.004


[[Page 79933]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR14NO16.005


[[Page 79934]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR14NO16.006


[[Page 79935]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR14NO16.007


[[Page 79936]]


BILLING CODE 6712-01-C
* * * * *

United States (US) Footnotes

* * * * *
    US151 In the band 37-38 GHz, stations in the fixed and mobile 
services shall not cause harmful interference to Federal earth stations 
in the space research service (space-to-Earth) at the following sites: 
Goldstone, CA; Socorro, NM; and White Sands, NM. Applications for non-
Federal use of this band shall be coordinated with NTIA in accordance 
with 47 CFR 30.205.
* * * * *

Non-Federal Government (NG) Footnotes

* * * * *
    NG63 In the band 37.5-40 GHz, earth station operations in the 
fixed-satellite service (space-to-Earth) shall not claim protection 
from stations in the fixed and mobile services, except where 
individually licensed earth stations are authorized pursuant to 47 CFR 
25.136.
* * * * *

0
8. Section 2.1091 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(1) introductory 
text to read as follows:


Sec.  2.1091  Radiofrequency radiation exposure evaluation: mobile 
devices.

* * * * *
    (c)(1) Mobile devices that operate in the Commercial Mobile Radio 
Services pursuant to part 20 of this chapter; the Cellular 
Radiotelephone Service pursuant to part 22 of this chapter; the 
Personal Communications Services pursuant to part 24 of this chapter; 
the Satellite Communications Services pursuant to part 25 of this 
chapter; the Miscellaneous Wireless Communications Services pursuant to 
part 27 of this chapter; the Upper Microwave Flexible Use Service 
pursuant to part 30 of this chapter; the Maritime Services (ship earth 
station devices only) pursuant to part 80 of this chapter; the 
Specialized Mobile Radio Service, and the 3650 MHz Wireless Broadband 
Service pursuant to part 90 of this chapter; and the Citizens Broadband 
Radio Service pursuant to part 96 of this chapter are subject to 
routine environmental evaluation for RF exposure prior to equipment 
authorization or use if:
* * * * *

0
9. Section 2.1093 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(1) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  2.1093  Radiofrequency radiation exposure evaluation: portable 
devices.

* * * * *
    (c)(1) Portable devices that operate in the Cellular Radiotelephone 
Service pursuant to part 22 of this chapter; the Personal 
Communications Service (PCS) pursuant to part 24 of this chapter; the 
Satellite Communications Services pursuant to part 25 of this chapter; 
the Miscellaneous Wireless Communications Services pursuant to part 27 
of this chapter; the Upper Microwave Flexible Use Service pursuant to 
part 30 of this chapter; the Maritime Services (ship earth station 
devices only) pursuant to part 80 of this chapter; the Specialized 
Mobile Radio Service, the 4.9 GHz Band Service, and the 3650 MHz 
Wireless Broadband Service pursuant to part 90 of this chapter; the 
Wireless Medical Telemetry Service (WMTS) and the Medical Device 
Radiocommunication Service (MedRadio), pursuant to subparts H and I of 
part 95 of this chapter, respectively, unlicensed personal 
communication service, unlicensed NII devices and millimeter wave 
devices authorized under Sec. Sec.  15.253(f), 15.255(g), 15.257(g), 
15.319(i), and 15.407(f) of this chapter; and the Citizens Broadband 
Radio Service pursuant to part 96 of this chapter are subject to 
routine environmental evaluation for RF exposure prior to equipment 
authorization or use.
* * * * *

PART 15--RADIO FREQUENCY DEVICES

0
10. The authority citation for part 15 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  47 U.S.C. 154, 302a, 303, 304, 307, 336, 544a, and 
549.

0
11. Section 15.255 is amended by revising the section heading, 
paragraphs (a)(2), (b), and (c)(1); removing paragraph (d); 
redesignating paragraphs (e) through (h) as paragraphs (d) through (g); 
revising newly redesignated paragraph (d)(2); and adding new paragraph 
(h) to read as follows:


Sec.  15.255  Operation within the band 57-71 GHz.

    (a) * * *
    (2) Field disturbance sensors, including vehicle radar systems, 
unless the field disturbance sensors are employed for fixed operation, 
or used as short-range devices for interactive motion sensing. For the 
purposes of this section, the reference to fixed operation includes 
field disturbance sensors installed in fixed equipment, even if the 
sensor itself moves within the equipment.
    (b) Within the 57-71 GHz band, emission levels shall not exceed the 
following equivalent isotropically radiated power (EIRP):
    (1) Products other than fixed field disturbance sensors and short-
range devices for interactive motion sensing shall comply with one of 
the following emission limits, as measured during the transmit 
interval:
    (i) The average power of any emission shall not exceed 40 dBm and 
the peak power of any emission shall not exceed 43 dBm; or
    (ii) For fixed point-to-point transmitters located outdoors, the 
average power of any emission shall not exceed 82 dBm, and shall be 
reduced by 2 dB for every dB that the antenna gain is less than 51 dBi. 
The peak power of any emission shall not exceed 85 dBm, and shall be 
reduced by 2 dB for every dB that the antenna gain is less than 51 dBi.
    (A) The provisions in this paragraph for reducing transmit power 
based on antenna gain shall not require that the power levels be 
reduced below the limits specified in paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this 
section.
    (B) The provisions of Sec.  15.204(c)(2) and (4) that permit the 
use of different antennas of the same type and of equal or less 
directional gain do not apply to intentional radiator systems operating 
under this provision. In lieu thereof, intentional radiator systems 
shall be certified using the specific antenna(s) with which the system 
will be marketed and operated. Compliance testing shall be performed 
using the highest gain and the lowest gain antennas for which 
certification is sought and with the intentional radiator operated at 
its maximum available output power level. The responsible party, as 
defined in Sec.  2.909 of this chapter, shall supply a list of 
acceptable antennas with the application for certification.
    (2) For fixed field disturbance sensors that occupy 500 MHz or less 
of bandwidth and that are contained wholly within the frequency band 
61.0-61.5 GHz, the average power of any emission, measured during the 
transmit interval, shall not exceed 40 dBm, and the peak power of any 
emission shall not exceed 43 dBm. In addition, the average power of any 
emission outside of the 61.0-61.5 GHz band, measured during the 
transmit interval, but still within the 57-71 GHz band, shall not 
exceed 10 dBm, and the peak power of any emission shall not exceed 13 
dBm.
    (3) For fixed field disturbance sensors other than those operating 
under the provisions of paragraph (b)(2) of this section, and short-
range devices for interactive motion sensing, the peak transmitter 
conducted output power

[[Page 79937]]

shall not exceed -10 dBm and the peak EIRP level shall not exceed 10 
dBm.
    (4) The peak power shall be measured with an RF detector that has a 
detection bandwidth that encompasses the 57-71 GHz band and has a video 
bandwidth of at least 10 MHz. The average emission levels shall be 
measured over the actual time period during which transmission occurs.
    (c) * * *
    (1) The power density of any emissions outside the 57-71 GHz band 
shall consist solely of spurious emissions.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) Peak transmitter conducted output power shall be measured with 
an RF detector that has a detection bandwidth that encompasses the 57-
71 GHz band and that has a video bandwidth of at least 10 MHz.
* * * * *
    (h) Measurement procedures that have been found to be acceptable to 
the Commission in accordance with Sec.  2.947 of this chapter may be 
used to demonstrate compliance.

PART 25--SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS

0
12. The authority citation for part 25 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  Interprets or applies 47 U.S.C. 154, 301, 302, 303, 
307, 309, 319, 332, 605, and 721, unless otherwise noted.

0
13. Add Sec.  25.136 to read as follows:


Sec.  25.136  Earth Stations in the 27.5-28.35 GHz and 37.5-40 GHz 
bands.

    (a) FSS is secondary to the Upper Microwave Flexible Use Service in 
the 27.5-28.35 GHz band. Notwithstanding that secondary status, an 
earth station in the 27.5-28.35 GHz band that meets one of the criteria 
listed below may operate consistent with the terms of its authorization 
without providing any additional interference protection to stations in 
the Upper Microwave Flexible Use Service:
    (1) The FSS licensee also holds the relevant Upper Microwave 
Flexible Use Service license(s) for the area in which the earth station 
generates a power flux density (PFD), at 10 meters above ground level, 
of greater than or equal to -77.6 dBm/m\2\/MHz;
    (2) The FSS earth station was authorized prior to July 14, 2016; or
    (3) The application for the FSS earth station was filed prior to 
July 14, 2016 and has been subsequently granted; or
    (4) The applicant demonstrates compliance with all of the following 
criteria in its application:
    (i) There are no more than two other authorized earth stations 
operating in the 27.5-28.35 GHz band within the county where the 
proposed earth station is located that meet the criteria contained in 
either paragraphs (a)(1), (2), (3), or (4) of this section. For 
purposes of this requirement, multiple earth stations that are 
collocated with or at a location contiguous to each other shall be 
considered as one earth station;
    (ii) The area in which the earth station generates a power flux 
density (PFD), at 10 meters above ground level, of greater than or 
equal to -77.6 dBm/m\2\/MHz, together with the similar area of any 
other earth station authorized pursuant to paragraph (a) of this 
section, does not cover, in the aggregate, more than 0.1 percent of the 
population of the county within which the earth station is located;
    (iii) The area in which the earth station generates a power flux 
density (PFD), at 10 meters above ground level, of greater than or 
equal to -77.6 dBm/m\2\/MHz does not contain any major event venue, 
arterial street, interstate or U.S. highway, urban mass transit route, 
passenger railroad, or cruise ship port; and
    (iv) The applicant has successfully completed frequency 
coordination with the UMFUS licensees within the area in which the 
earth station generates a power flux density (PFD), at 10 meters above 
ground level, of greater than or equal to -77.6 dBm/m\2\/MHz with 
respect to existing facilities constructed and in operation by the 
UMFUS licensee. In coordinating with UMFUS licensees, the applicant 
shall use the applicable processes contained in Sec.  101.103(d) of 
this chapter.
    (b) Applications for earth stations in the 37.5-40 GHz band shall 
provide an exhibit describing the zone within which the earth station 
will require protection from transmissions of Upper Microwave Flexible 
Use Service licensees. For purposes of this rule, the protection zone 
shall consist of the area where UMFUS licensees may not locate 
facilities without the consent of the earth station licensee. The earth 
station applicant shall demonstrate in its application, using 
reasonable engineering methods, that the requested protection zone is 
necessary in order to protect its proposed earth station.
    (c) The protection zone (as defined in paragraph (b) of this 
section) shall comply with the following criteria. The applicant shall 
demonstrate compliance with all of the following criteria in its 
application:
    (1) There are no more than two other authorized earth stations 
operating in the 37.5-40 GHz band within the Partial Economic Area 
within which the proposed earth station is located that meet the 
criteria contained in paragraph (c) of this section. For purposes of 
this requirement, multiple earth stations that are collocated with or 
at a location contiguous to each other shall be considered as one earth 
station;
    (2) The protection zone, together with the protection zone of other 
earth stations in the same Partial Economic Area authorized pursuant to 
this section, does not cover, in the aggregate, more than 0.1 percent 
of the population of the Partial Economic Area within which the earth 
station is located;
    (3) The protection zone does not contain any major event venue, 
arterial street, interstate or U.S. highway, urban mass transit route, 
passenger railroad, or cruise ship port; and
    (4) The applicant has successfully completed frequency coordination 
with the UMFUS licensees within the protection zone with respect to 
existing facilities constructed and in operation by the UMFUS licensee. 
In coordinating with UMFUS licensees, the applicant shall use the 
applicable processes contained in Sec.  101.103(d) of this chapter.
    (d) If an earth station applicant or licensee in the 27.5-28.35 GHz 
or 37. 5-40 GHz bands enters into an agreement with an UMFUS licensee, 
their operations shall be governed by that agreement, except to the 
extent that the agreement is inconsistent with the Commission's rules 
or the Communications Act.


0
14. Section 25.202 is amended by revising footnotes 1 and 7 to the 
table in paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:


Sec.  25.202  Frequencies, frequency tolerance, and emission limits.

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
    \1\ Use of this band by the Fixed-Satellite Service is limited to 
individually licensed earth stations. Satellite earth station 
facilities in this band may not be ubiquitously deployed and may not be 
used to serve individual consumers.
* * * * *
    \7\ The Fixed-Satellite Service is secondary to the Upper Microwave 
Flexible Use Service authorized pursuant to 47 CFR part 30, except for 
FSS operations associated with earth stations authorized pursuant to 47 
CFR 25.136.
* * * * *

0
15. Part 30 is added to read as follows:

[[Page 79938]]

PART 30--UPPER MICROWAVE FLEXIBLE USE SERVICE

Subpart A--General
Sec.
30.1 Creation of upper microwave flexible use service.
30.2 Definitions.
30.3 Eligibility.
30.4 Frequencies.
30.5 Service areas.
30.6 Permissible communications.
30.7 37-37.6 GHz Band--Shared coordinated service.
30.8 5G Provider cybersecurity statement requirements.
Subpart B--Applications and Licenses
30.101 Initial authorizations.
30.102 Transition of existing local multipoint distribution service 
and 39 GHz licenses.
30.103 License term.
30.104 Construction requirements.
30.105 Geographic partitioning and spectrum disaggregation.
30.106 Discontinuance of service.
Subpart C--Technical Standards
30.201 Equipment authorization.
30.202 Power limits.
30.203 Emission limits.
30.204 Field strength limits.
30.205 Federal coordination requirements.
30.206 International coordination.
30.207 Radio frequency (RF) safety.
30.208 Operability.
30.209 Duplexing.
Subpart D--Competitive Bidding Procedures
30.301 Upper Microwave Flexible Use Service subject to competitive 
bidding.
30.302 Designated entities and bidding credits.
Subpart E--Special Provisions for Fixed Point-to-Point, Fixed Point-to-
Multipoint Hub Stations, and Fixed Point-to-Multipoint User Stations
30.401 Permissible service.
30.402 Frequency tolerance.
30.403 Bandwidth.
30.404 Emission limits.
30.405 Transmitter power limitations.
30.406 Directional antennas.
30.407 Antenna polarization.

    Authority:  47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 153, 154, 301, 303, 304, 307, 
309, 310, 316, 332, 1302.

Subpart A--General


Sec.  30.1  Creation of upper microwave flexible use service, scope and 
authority.

    As of December 14, 2016, Local Multipoint Distribution Service 
licenses for the 27.5-28.35 GHz band, and licenses issued in the 38.6-
40 GHz band under part 101 of this chapter shall be reassigned to the 
Upper Microwave Flexible Use Service. Local Multipoint Distribution 
Service licenses in bands other than 27.5-28.35 GHz shall remain in 
that service and shall be governed by the part 101 of this chapter 
applicable to that service.


Sec.  30.2  Definitions.

    The following definitions apply to this part:
    Authorized bandwidth. The maximum width of the band of frequencies 
permitted to be used by a station. This is normally considered to be 
the necessary or occupied bandwidth, whichever is greater. (See Sec.  
2.202 of this chapter).
    Authorized frequency. The frequency, or frequency range, assigned 
to a station by the Commission and specified in the instrument of 
authorization.
    Fixed satellite earth station. An earth station intended to be used 
at a specified fixed point.
    Local Area Operations. Operations confined to physical facility 
boundaries, such as a factory.
    Point-to-Multipoint Hub Station. A fixed point-to-multipoint radio 
station that provides one-way or two-way communication with fixed 
Point-to-Multipoint Service User Stations.
    Point-to-Multipoint Service. A fixed point-to-multipoint radio 
service consisting of point-to-multipoint hub stations that communicate 
with fixed point-to-multipoint user stations.
    Point-to-Multipoint User Station. A fixed radio station located at 
users' premises, lying within the coverage area of a Point-to-
Multipoint Hub station, using a directional antenna to receive one-way 
communications from or providing two-way communications with a fixed 
Point-to-Multipoint Hub Station.
    Point-to-point station. A station that transmits a highly 
directional signal from a fixed transmitter location to a fixed receive 
location.
    Portable device. Transmitters designed to be used within 20 
centimeters of the body of the user.
    Prior coordination. A bilateral process conducted prior to filing 
applications which includes the distribution of the technical 
parameters of a proposed radio system to potentially affected parties 
for their evaluation and timely response.
    Secondary operations. Radio communications which may not cause 
interference to operations authorized on a primary basis and which are 
not protected from interference from these primary operations
    Transportable station. Transmitting equipment that is not intended 
to be used while in motion, but rather at stationary locations.
    Universal Licensing System. The Universal Licensing System (ULS) is 
the consolidated database, application filing system, and processing 
system for all Wireless Radio Services. ULS supports electronic filing 
of all applications and related documents by applicants and licensees 
in the Wireless Radio Services, and provides public access to licensing 
information.


Sec.  30.3  Eligibility.

    Any entity who meets the technical, financial, character, and 
citizenship qualifications that the Commission may require in 
accordance with such Act, other than those precluded by section 310 of 
the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 310, is eligible 
to hold a license under this part.


Sec.  30.4  Frequencies.

    The following frequencies are available for assignment in the Upper 
Microwave Flexible Use Service:
    (a) 27.5 GHz--28.35 GHz band--27.5-27.925 GHz and 27.925-28.35 GHz.
    (b) 38.6-40 GHz band:
    (1) New channel plan:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Frequency band
                     Channel No.                          limits (MHz)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1....................................................      38,600-38,800
2....................................................      38,800-39,000
3....................................................      39,000-39,200
4....................................................      39,200-39,400
5....................................................      39,400-39,600
6....................................................      39,600-39,800
7....................................................      39,800-40,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) Pending transition to the new channel plan, existing 39 GHz 
licensees licensed under part 101 of this chapter may continue 
operating on the following channel plan:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Channel group A                                          Channel group B
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Frequency band                                    Frequency band
                Channel No.                     limits (MHz)             Channel No.              limits (MHz)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-A........................................      38,600-38,650  1-B..........................      39,300-39,350
2-A........................................      38,650-38,700  2-B..........................      39,350-39,400
3-A........................................      38,700-38,750  3-B..........................      39,400-39,450
4-A........................................      38,750-38,800  4-B..........................      39,450-39,500

[[Page 79939]]

 
5-A........................................      38,800-38,850  5-B..........................      39,500-39,550
6-A........................................      38,850-38,900  6-B..........................      39,550-39,600
7-A........................................      38,900-38,950  7-B..........................      39,600-39,650
8-A........................................      38,950-39,000  8-B..........................      39,650-39,700
9-A........................................      39,000-39,050  9-B..........................      39,700-39,750
10-A.......................................      39,050-39,100  10-B.........................      39,750-39,800
11-A.......................................      39,100-39,150  11-B.........................      39,800-39,850
12-A.......................................      39,150-39,200  12-B.........................      39,850-39,900
13-A.......................................      39,200-39,250  13-B.........................      39,900-39,950
14-A.......................................      39,250-39,300  14-B.........................      39,950-40,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (c) 37-38.6 GHz band: 37,600-37,800 MHz; 37,800-38,000 MHz; 38,000-
38,200 MHz; 38,200-38,400 MHz, and 38,400-38,600 MHz. The 37,000-37,600 
MHz band segment shall be available on a site-specific, coordinated 
shared basis with eligible Federal entities.


Sec.  30.5  Service areas.

    (a) Except as noted in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, and 
except for the shared 37-37.6 GHz band, the service areas for the Upper 
Microwave Flexible Use Service are Partial Economic Areas.
    (b) For the 27.5-28.35 GHz band, the service areas shall be 
counties.
    (c) Common Carrier Fixed Point-to-Point Microwave Stations licensed 
in the 38.6-40 GHz bands licensed with Rectangular Service Areas shall 
maintain their Rectangular Service Area as defined in their 
authorization. The frequencies associated with Rectangular Service Area 
authorizations that have expired, cancelled, or otherwise been 
recovered by the Commission will automatically revert to the applicable 
county licensee.
    (d) In the 37.5-40 GHz band, Upper Microwave Flexible Use Service 
licensees shall not place facilities within the protection zone of 
Fixed-Satellite Service earth stations authorized pursuant to Sec.  
25.136 of this chapter, absent consent from the Fixed-Satellite Service 
earth station licensee.


Sec.  30.6  Permissible communications.

    (a) A licensee in the frequency bands specified in Sec.  30.4 may 
provide any services for which its frequency bands are allocated, as 
set forth in the non-Federal Government column of the Table of 
Frequency Allocations in Sec.  2.106 of this chapter (column 5).
    (b) Fixed-Satellite Service shall be provided in a manner 
consistent with part 25 of this chapter.


Sec.  30.7  37-37.6 GHz Band--Shared coordinated service.

    (a) The 37-37.6 GHz band will be available for site-based 
registrations on a coordinated basis with co-equal eligible Federal 
entities.
    (b) Any non-Federal entity meeting the eligibility requirements of 
Sec.  30.3 may operate equipment that complies with the technical rules 
of this part pursuant to a Shared Access License.
    (c) Licensees in the 37-37.6 GHz band must register their 
individual base stations and access points prior to placing them in 
operation.


Sec.  30.8  5G Provider cybersecurity statement requirements.

    (a) Statement. Each Upper Microwave Flexible Use Service licensee 
is required to submit to the Commission a Statement describing its 
network security plans and related information, which shall be signed 
by a senior executive within the licensee's organization with personal 
knowledge of the security plans and practices within the licensee's 
organization. The Statement must contain, at a minimum, the following 
elements:
    (1) Security approach. A high-level, general description of the 
licensee's approach designed to safeguard the planned network's 
confidentiality, integrity, and availability, with respect to 
communications from:
    (i) A device to the licensee's network;
    (ii) One element of the licensee's network to another element on 
the licensee's network;
    (iii) The licensee's network to another network; and
    (iv) Device to device (with respect to telephone voice and 
messaging services).
    (2) Cybersecurity coordination. A high-level, general description 
of the licensee's anticipated approach to assessing and mitigating 
cyber risk induced by the presence of multiple participants in the 
band. This should include the high level approach taken toward ensuring 
consumer network confidentiality, integrity, and availability security 
principles, are to be protected in each of the following use cases: 
communications between a wireless device and the licensee's network; 
communications within and between each licensee's network; 
communications between mobile devices that are under end-to-end control 
of the licensee; and communications between mobile devices that are not 
under the end-to-end control of the licensee;
    (3) Cybersecurity standards and best practices. A high-level 
description of relevant cybersecurity standards and practices to be 
employed, whether industry-recognized or related to some other 
identifiable approach;
    (4) Participation with standards bodies, industry-led 
organizations. A description of the extent to which the licensee 
participates with standards bodies or industry-led organizations 
pursuing the development or maintenance of emerging security standards 
and/or best practices;
    (5) Other security approaches. The high-level identification of any 
other approaches to security, unique to the services and devices the 
licensee intends to offer and deploy; and
    (6) Plans with Information Sharing and Analysis Organizations. 
Plans to incorporate relevant outputs from Information Sharing and 
Analysis Organizations (ISAOs) as elements of the licensee's security 
architecture. Plans should include comment on machine-to-machine threat 
information sharing, and any use of anticipated standards for ISAO-
based information sharing.
    (b) Timing. Each Upper Microwave Flexible Use Service licensee 
shall submit this Statement to the Commission within three years after 
grant of the license, but no later than six months prior to deployment.
    (c) Definitions. The following definitions apply to this section:
    Availability. The accessibility and usability of a network upon 
demand.
    Confidentiality. The protection of data from unauthorized access 
and disclosure, both while at rest and in transit.

[[Page 79940]]

    Integrity. The protection against the unauthorized modification or 
destruction of information.

Subpart B--Applications and Licenses


Sec.  30.101  Initial authorizations.

    Except with respect to in the 37-37.6 GHz band, an applicant must 
file a single application for an initial authorization for all markets 
won and frequency blocks desired. Initial authorizations shall be 
granted in accordance with Sec.  30.4. Applications for individual 
sites are not required and will not be accepted, except where required 
for environmental assessments, in accordance with Sec. Sec.  1.1301 
through 1.1319 of this chapter.


Sec.  30.102  Transition of existing local multipoint distribution 
service and 39 GHz licenses.

    Local Multipoint Distribution Service licenses in the 27.5--28.35 
GHz band issued on a Basic Trading Area basis shall be disaggregated 
into county-based licenses and 39 GHz licenses issued on an Economic 
Area basis shall be disaggregated into Partial Economic Area-based 
licenses on December 14, 2016. For each county in the Basic Trading 
Area or Partial Economic Area in the Economic Area which is part of the 
original license, the licensee shall receive a separate license. If 
there is a co-channel Rectangular Service Area licensee within the 
service area of a 39 GHz Economic Area licensee, the disaggregated 
license shall not authorize operation with the service area of the 
Rectangular Service Area license.


Sec.  30.103  License term.

    Initial authorizations will have a term not to exceed ten years 
from the date of initial issuance or renewal.


Sec.  30.104  Construction requirements.

    (a) Upper Microwave Flexible Use Service licensees must make a 
buildout showing as part of their renewal applications. Licensees 
relying on mobile or point-to-multipoint service must show that they 
are providing reliable signal coverage and service to at least 40 
percent of the population within the service area of the licensee, and 
that they are using facilities to provide service in that area either 
to customers or for internal use. Licensees relying on point-to-point 
service must demonstrate that they have four links operating and 
providing service, either to customers or for internal use, if the 
population within the license area is equal to or less than 268,000. If 
the population within the license area is greater than 268,000, a 
licensee relying on point-to-point service must demonstrate it has at 
least one link in operation and is providing service for each 67,000 
population within the license area.
    (b) Showings that rely on a combination of multiple types of 
service will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
    (c) If a licensee in this service is also a Fixed-Satellite Service 
licensee and uses the spectrum covered under its UMFUS license in 
connection with a satellite earth station, it can demonstrate 
compliance with the requirements of this section by demonstrating that 
the earth station in question is in service, operational, and using the 
spectrum associated with the license. This provision can only be used 
to demonstrate compliance for the county in which the earth station is 
located.
    (d) Failure to meet this requirement will result in automatic 
cancellation of the license. In bands licensed on a Partial Economic 
Area basis, licensees will have the option of partitioning a license on 
a county basis in order to reduce the population within the license 
area to a level where the licensee's buildout would meet one of the 
applicable performance metrics.
    (e) Existing 28 GHz and 39 GHz licensees shall be required to make 
a showing pursuant to this rule by June 1, 2024.


Sec.  30.105  Geographic partitioning and spectrum disaggregation.

    (a) Parties seeking approval for partitioning and disaggregation 
shall request from the Commission an authorization for partial 
assignment of a license pursuant to Sec.  1.948 of this chapter. Upper 
Microwave Flexible Use Service licensees may apply to partition their 
licensed geographic service area or disaggregate their licensed 
spectrum at any time following the grant of their licenses.
    (b) Technical standards--(1) Partitioning. In the case of 
partitioning, applicants and licensees must file FCC Form 603 pursuant 
to Sec.  1.948 of this chapter and list the partitioned service area on 
a schedule to the application. The geographic coordinates must be 
specified in degrees, minutes, and seconds to the nearest second of 
latitude and longitude and must be based upon the 1983 North American 
Datum (NAD83).
    (2) Spectrum may be disaggregated in any amount.
    (3) The Commission will consider requests for partial assignment of 
licenses that propose combinations of partitioning and disaggregation.
    (4) For purposes of partitioning and disaggregation, part 30 
systems must be designed so as not to exceed the signal level specified 
for the particular spectrum block in Sec.  30.204 at the licensee's 
service area boundary, unless the affected adjacent service area 
licensees have agreed to a different signal level.
    (c) License term. The license term for a partitioned license area 
and for disaggregated spectrum shall be the remainder of the original 
licensee's license term as provided for in Sec.  30.103.
    (d)(1) Parties to partitioning agreements must satisfy the 
construction requirements set forth in Sec.  30.104 by the partitioner 
and partitionee each certifying that it will independently meet the 
construction requirement for its respective partitioned license area. 
If the partitioner or partitionee fails to meet the construction 
requirement for its respective partitioned license area, then the 
relevant partitioned license will automatically cancel.
    (2) Parties to disaggregation agreements must satisfy the 
construction requirements set forth in Sec.  30.104 by the 
disaggregator and disaggregatee each certifying that it will 
independently meet the construction requirement for its respective 
disaggregated license area. If the disaggregator or disaggregatee fails 
to meet the construction requirement for its respective disaggregated 
license area, then the relevant disaggregated license will 
automatically cancel.


Sec.  30.106  Discontinuance of service.

    (a) An Upper Microwave Flexible Use License authorization will 
automatically terminate, without specific Commission action, if the 
licensee permanently discontinues service after the initial license 
term.
    (b) For licensees with common carrier regulatory status, permanent 
discontinuance of service is defined as 180 consecutive days during 
which a licensee does not provide service to at least one subscriber 
that is not affiliated with, controlled by, or related to the licensee 
in the individual license area. For licensees with non-common carrier 
status, permanent discontinuance of service is defined as 180 
consecutive days during which a licensee does not operate.
    (c) A licensee that permanently discontinues service as defined in 
this section must notify the Commission of the discontinuance within 10 
days by filing FCC Form 601 or 605 requesting license cancellation. An 
authorization will automatically terminate, without specific Commission 
action, if service is permanently discontinued as defined in this 
section, even if a licensee fails to

[[Page 79941]]

file the required form requesting license cancellation.

Subpart C--Technical Standards


Sec.  30.201  Equipment authorization.

    (a) Except as provided under paragraph (c) of this section, each 
transmitter utilized for operation under this part must be of a type 
that has been authorized by the Commission under its certification 
procedure.
    (b) Any manufacturer of radio transmitting equipment to be used in 
these services may request equipment authorization following the 
procedures set forth in subpart J of part 2 of this chapter. Equipment 
authorization for an individual transmitter may be requested by an 
applicant for a station authorization by following the procedures set 
forth in part 2 of this chapter.
    (c) Unless specified otherwise, transmitters for use under the 
provisions of subpart E of this part for fixed point-to-point microwave 
and point-to-multipoint services must be a type that has been verified 
for compliance.


Sec.  30.202  Power limits.

    (a) For fixed and base stations operating in connection with mobile 
systems, the average power of the sum of all antenna elements is 
limited to an equivalent isotopically radiated power (EIRP) density of 
+75dBm/100 MHz. For channel bandwidths less than 100 megahertz the EIRP 
must be reduced proportionally and linearly based on the bandwidth 
relative to 100 megahertz.
    (b) For mobile stations, the average power of the sum of all 
antenna elements is limited to a maximum EIRP of +43 dBm.
    (c) For transportable stations, as defined in Sec.  30.2, the 
average power of the sum of all antenna elements is limited to a 
maximum EIRP of +55 dBm.
    (d) For fixed point-to-point and point-to-multipoint limits see 
Sec.  30.405.


Sec.  30.203  Emission limits.

    (a) The conductive power or the total radiated power of any 
emission outside a licensee's frequency block shall be -13 dBm/MHz or 
lower. However, in the bands immediately outside and adjacent to the 
licensee's frequency block, having a bandwidth equal to 10 percent of 
the channel bandwidth, the conductive power or the total radiated power 
of any emission shall be -5 dBm/MHz or lower.
    (b)(1) Compliance with this provision is based on the use of 
measurement instrumentation employing a resolution bandwidth of 1 
megahertz or greater.
    (2) When measuring the emission limits, the nominal carrier 
frequency shall be adjusted as close to the licensee's frequency block 
edges as the design permits.
    (3) The measurements of emission power can be expressed in peak or 
average values.
    (c) For fixed point-to-point and point-to-multipoint limits see 
Sec.  30.404.


Sec.  30.204  Field strength limits.

    (a) Base/mobile operations: The predicted or measured Power Flux 
Density (PFD) from any Base Station operating in the 27.5-28.35 GHz 
band, 37-38.6 GHz band, and 38.6-40 GHz bands at any location on the 
geographical border of a licensee's service area shall not exceed -
76dBm/m\2\/MHz (measured at 1.5 meters above ground) unless the 
adjacent affected service area licensee(s) agree(s) to a different PFD.
    (b) Fixed point-to-point operations. (1) Prior to operating a fixed 
point-to-point transmitting facility in the 27,500-28,350 MHz band 
where the facilities are located within 20 kilometers of the boundary 
of the licensees authorized market area, the licensee must complete 
frequency coordination in accordance with the procedures specified in 
Sec.  101.103(d)(2) of this chapter with respect to neighboring 
licensees that may be affected by its operations.
    (2) Prior to operating a fixed point-to-point transmitting facility 
in the 37,000-40,000 MHz band where the facilities are located within 
16 kilometers of the boundary of the licensees authorized market area, 
the licensee must complete frequency coordination in accordance with 
the procedures specified in Sec.  101.103(d)(2) of this chapter with 
respect to neighboring licensees that may be affected by its 
operations.


Sec.  30.205  Federal coordination requirements.

    (a) Licensees in the 37-38 GHz band located within the zones 
defined by the coordinates in the tables below must coordinate their 
operations with Federal Space Research Service (space to Earth) users 
of the band via the National Telecommunications and Information 
Administration (NTIA). All licensees operating within the zone defined 
by the 60 dBm/100 MHz EIRP coordinates in the tables below must 
coordinate all operations. Licensees operating within the area between 
the zones defined by the 60 dBm and 75 dBm/100 MHz EIRP coordinates in 
the tables below must coordinate all operations if their base station 
EIRP is greater than 60 dBm/100 MHz or if their antenna height exceeds 
100 meters above ground level. Licensees operating outside the zones 
defined by the 75 dBm/100 MHz EIRP coordinates in the tables below are 
not required to coordinate their operations with NTIA.

                        Table 1 to Paragraph (a): Goldstone, California Coordination Zone
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      60 dBm/100 MHz EIRP                                      75 dBm/100 MHz EIRP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Latitude/Longitude       Latitude/Longitude       Latitude/Longitude
Latitude/Longitude  (decimal degrees)     (decimal degrees)        (decimal degrees)        (decimal degrees)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
34.69217/-115.6491...................  34.19524/-117.47963....  34.69217/-115.6491.....  34.19524/-117.47963
35.25746/-115.32041..................  34.24586/-117.36210....  35.25746/-115.32041....  34.24586/-117.36210
36.21257/-117.06567..................  35.04648/-117.03781....  36.11221/-116.63632....  34.21748/-117.12812
36.55967/-117.63691..................  35.04788/-117.00949....  36.54731/-117.48242....  34.20370/-116.97024
36.66297/-118.31017..................  34.22940/-117.22327....  36.73049/-118.33683....  34.12196/-116.93109
36.06074/-118.38528..................  34.20370/-116.97024....  36.39126/-118.47307....  34.09498/-116.75473
35.47015/-118.39008..................  34.12196/-116.93109....  36.36891/-118.47134....  34.13603/-116.64002
35.40865/-118.34353..................  34.09498/-116.75473....  35.47015/-118.39008....  34.69217/-115.6591
35.35986/-117.24709..................  34.19642/-116.72901....  35.40865/-118.34353....  34.69217/-115.6491
35.29539/-117.21102..................  34.64906/-116.62741....  35.32048/-117.26386
34.67607/-118.55412..................  34.44404/-116.31486....  34.63725/-118.96736
34.61532/-118.36919..................  34.52736/-116.27845....  34.55789/-118.36204
34.91551/-117.70371..................  34.76685/-116.27930....  34.51108/-118.15329
34.81257/-117.65400..................  34.69217/-115.6591.....  34.39220/-118.28852
34.37411/-118.18385..................  34.69217/-115.6491.....  34.38546/-118.27460

[[Page 79942]]

 
34.33405/-117.94189..................  .......................  34.37524/-118.24191
34.27249/-117.65445..................  .......................  34.37039/-118.22557
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


     Table 2 to Paragraph (a): Socorro, New Mexico Coordination Zone
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 60 dBm/100 MHz EIRP                    75 dBm/100 MHz
-----------------------------------------------------        EIRP
                                                     -------------------
  Latitude/Longitude  (decimal    Latitude/Longitude  Latitude/Longitude
            degrees)               (decimal degrees)   (decimal degrees)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
34.83816/-107.66828.............  33.44401/-          33.10651/-
                                   108.67876.          108.19320
34.80070/-107.68759.............  33.57963/-          33.11780/-
                                   107.79895.          107.99980
34.56506/-107.70233.............  33.84552/-          33.13558/-
                                   107.60207.          107.85611
34.40826/-107.71489.............  33.85964/-          33.80383/-
                                   107.51915.          107.16520
34.31013/-107.88349.............  33.86479/-          33.94554/-
                                   107.17223.          107.15516
34.24067/-107.96059.............  33.94779/-          33.95665/-
                                   107.15038.          107.15480
34.10278/-108.23166.............  34.11122/-          34.08156/-
                                   107.18132.          107.18137
34.07442/-108.30646.............  34.15203/-          34.10646/-
                                   107.39035.          107.18938
34.01447/-108.31694.............  34.29643/-          35.24269/-
                                   107.51071.          107.67969
33.86740/-108.48706.............  34.83816/-          34.06647/-
                                   107.66828.          108.70438
33.81660/-108.51052.............  33.35946/-
                                   108.68902
33.67909/-108.58750.............  33.29430/-
                                   108.65004
33.50223/-108.65470.............  33.10651/-
                                   108.19320
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                       Table 3 to Paragraph (a): White Sands, New Mexico Coordination Zone
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      60 dBm/100 MHz EIRP                                      75 dBm/100 MHz EIRP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Latitude/Longitude       Latitude/Longitude       Latitude/Longitude
Latitude/Longitude  (decimal degrees)     (decimal degrees)        (decimal degrees)        (decimal degrees)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
33.98689/-107.15967..................  31.78455/-106.54058....  31.7494/-106.49132.....  32.88382/-108.16588
33.91573/-107.46301..................  32.24710/-106.56114....  32.24524/-106.56507....  32.76255/-108.05679
33.73122/-107.73585..................  32.67731/-106.53681....  32.67731/-106.53681....  32.56863/-108.43999
33.37098/-107.84333..................  32.89856/-106.56882....  32.89856/-106.56882....  32.48991/-108.50032
33.25424/-107.86409..................  33.24323/-106.70094....  33.04880/-106.62309....  32.39142/-108.48959
33.19808/-107.89673..................  33.98689/-107.15967....  33.21824/-106.68992....  31.63664/-108.40480
33.02128/-107.87226..................  33.24347/-106.70165....  31.63466/-108.20921
32.47747/-107.77963..................  34.00708/-107.08652....  31.78374/-108.20798
32.31543/-108.16101..................  34.04967/-107.17524....  31.78322/-106.52825
31.79429/-107.88616..................  33.83491/-107.85971....  31.7494/-106.49132
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Licensees in the 37-38.6 GHz band located within the zones 
defined by the coordinates in the table below must coordinate their 
operations with the Department of Defense via the National 
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA).

                   Table to Paragraph (b)--Coordination Areas for Federal Terrestrial Systems
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Location                              Agency               Coordination area  (decimal degrees)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
China Lake, CA..........................  Navy.........................  30 kilometer radius centered on
                                                                          latitude 35.59527 and longitude -
                                                                          117.22583.
                                                                         30 kilometer radius centered on
                                                                          latitude 35.52222 and longitude -
                                                                          117.30333.
                                                                         30 kilometer radius centered on
                                                                          latitude 35.76222 and longitude -
                                                                          117.60055.
                                                                         30 kilometer radius centered on
                                                                          latitude 35.69111 and longitude -
                                                                          117.66916.
San Diego, CA...........................  Navy.........................  30 kilometer radius centered on
                                                                          latitude 32.68333 and longitude -
                                                                          117.23333.
Nanakuli, HI............................  Navy.........................  30 kilometer radius centered on
                                                                          latitude 21.38333 and longitude -
                                                                          158.13333.
Fishers Island, NY......................  Navy.........................  30 kilometer radius centered on
                                                                          latitude 41.25 and longitude -
                                                                          72.01666.
Saint Croix, VI.........................  Navy.........................  30 kilometer radius centered on
                                                                          latitude 17.74722 and longitude -
                                                                          64.88.
Fort Irwin, CA..........................  Army.........................  30 kilometer radius centered on
                                                                          latitude 35.26666 and longitude -
                                                                          116.68333.
Fort Carson, CO.........................  Army.........................  30 kilometer radius centered on
                                                                          latitude 38.71666 and longitude -
                                                                          104.65.
Fort Hood, TX...........................  Army.........................  30 kilometer radius centered on
                                                                          latitude 31.11666 and longitude -
                                                                          97.76666.
Fort Bliss, TX..........................  Army.........................  30 kilometer radius centered on
                                                                          latitude 31.8075 and longitude -
                                                                          106.42166.
Yuma Proving Ground, AZ.................  Army.........................  30 kilometer radius centered on
                                                                          latitude 32.48333 and longitude -
                                                                          114.33333.
Fort Huachuca, AZ.......................  Army.........................  30 kilometer radius centered on
                                                                          latitude 31.55 and longitude -110.35.
White Sands Missile Range, NM...........  Army.........................  30 kilometer radius centered on
                                                                          latitude 33.35 and longitude -106.3.

[[Page 79943]]

 
Moody Air Force Base, GA................  Air Force....................  30 kilometer radius centered on
                                                                          latitude 30.96694 and longitude -
                                                                          83.185.
Hurlburt Air Force Base, FL.............  Air Force....................  30 kilometer radius centered on
                                                                          latitude 30.42388 and longitude -
                                                                          86.70694.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec.  30.206  International coordination.

    Operations in the 27.5-28.35 GHz, 37-38.6, and 38.6-40 GHz bands 
are subject to existing and future international agreements with Canada 
and Mexico.


Sec.  30.207  Radio frequency (RF) safety.

    Licensees and manufacturers are subject to the radio frequency 
radiation exposure requirements specified in Sec. Sec.  1.1307(b), 
1.1310, 2.1091, and 2.1093 of this chapter, as appropriate. 
Applications for equipment authorization of mobile or portable devices 
operating under this section must contain a statement confirming 
compliance with these requirements. Technical information showing the 
basis for this statement must be submitted to the Commission upon 
request.


Sec.  30.208  Operability.

    Mobile and transportable stations that operate on any portion of 
frequencies within the 27.5-28.35 GHz or the 37-40 GHz bands must be 
capable of operating on all frequencies within those particular bands.


Sec.  30.209  Duplexing.

    Stations authorized under this rule part may employ frequency 
division duplexing, time division duplexing, or any other duplexing 
scheme, provided that they comply with the other technical and 
operational requirements specified in this part.

Subpart D--Competitive Bidding Procedures


Sec.  30.301  Upper Microwave Flexible Use Service subject to 
competitive bidding.

    Mutually exclusive initial applications for Upper Microwave 
Flexible User Service licenses are subject to competitive bidding. The 
general competitive bidding procedures set forth in part 1, subpart Q 
of this chapter will apply unless otherwise provided in this subpart.


Sec.  30.302  Designated entities and bidding credits.

    (a) Eligibility for small business provisions. (1) A small business 
is an entity that, together with its affiliates, its controlling 
interests and the affiliates of its controlling interests, have average 
gross revenues that are not more than $55 million for the preceding 
three (3) years.
    (2) A very small business is an entity that, together with its 
affiliates, its controlling interests and the affiliates of its 
controlling interests, has average gross revenues that are not more 
than $20 million for the preceding three (3) years.
    (b) Bidding credits. A winning bidder that qualifies as a small 
business, as defined in this section, or a consortium of small 
businesses may use a bidding credit of 15 percent, as specified in 
Sec.  1.2110(f)(2)(i)(C) of this chapter. A winning bidder that 
qualifies as a very small business, as defined in this section, or a 
consortium of very small businesses may use a bidding credit of 25 
percent, as specified in Sec.  1.2110(f)(2)(i)(B) of this chapter.
    (c) A rural service provider, as defined in Sec.  1.2110(f)(4) of 
this chapter, who has not claimed a small business bidding credit may 
use a bidding credit of 15 percent bidding credit, as specified in 
Sec.  1.2110(f)(4)(i) of this chapter.

Subpart E--Special Provisions for Fixed Point-to-Point, Fixed 
Point-to-Multipoint Hub Stations, and Fixed Point-to-Multipoint 
User Stations


Sec.  30.401  Permissible service.

    Stations authorized under this subpart may deploy stations used 
solely as fixed point-to-point stations, fixed point-to-multipoint hub 
stations, or fixed point-to-multipoint user stations, as defined in 
Sec.  30.2, subject to the technical and operational requirements 
specified in this subpart.


Sec.  30.402  Frequency tolerance.

    The carrier frequency of each transmitter authorized under this 
subpart must be maintained within the following percentage of the 
reference frequency (unless otherwise specified in the instrument of 
station authorization the reference frequency will be deemed to be the 
assigned frequency):

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Frequency
                     Frequency (MHz)                         tolerance
                                                             (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
27,500 to 28,350........................................           0.001
38,600 to 40,000........................................            0.03
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec.  30.403  Bandwidth.

    (a) Stations under this subpart will be authorized any type of 
emission, method of modulation, and transmission characteristic, 
consistent with efficient use of the spectrum and good engineering 
practice.
    (b) The maximum bandwidth authorized per frequency to stations 
under this subpart is set out in the table that follows.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Maximum
                  Frequency band  (MHz)                     authorized
                                                             bandwidth
------------------------------------------------------------------------
27,500 to 28,350........................................        850 MHz.
38,600 to 40,000........................................     200 MHz.\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For channel block assignments in the 38,600-40,000 MHz bands when
  adjacent channels are aggregated, equipment is permitted to operate
  over the full channel block aggregation without restriction.

Sec.  30.404  Emission limits.

    (a) The mean power of emissions must be attenuated below the mean 
output power of the transmitter in accordance with the following 
schedule:
    (1) When using transmissions other than those employing digital 
modulation techniques:
    (i) On any frequency removed from the assigned frequency by more 
than 50 percent up to and including 100 percent of the authorized 
bandwidth: At least 25 decibels;
    (ii) On any frequency removed from the assigned frequency by more 
than 100 percent up to and including 250 percent of the authorized 
bandwidth: At least 35 decibels;
    (iii) On any frequency removed from the assigned frequency by more 
than 250 percent of the authorized bandwidth: At least 43 + 10 
Log10 (mean output power in watts) decibels, or 80 decibels, 
whichever is the lesser attenuation.
    (2) When using transmissions employing digital modulation 
techniques in situations not covered in this section:
    (i) In any 1 MHz band, the center frequency of which is removed 
from the assigned frequency by more than 50 percent up to and including 
250 percent of the authorized bandwidth: As specified by the following 
equation but in no event less than 11 decibels:


[[Page 79944]]


A = 11 + 0.4(P-50) + 10 Log10 B. (Attenuation greater than 
56 decibels or to an absolute power of less than -13 dBm/1MHz is not 
required.)
    (ii) In any 1 MHz band, the center frequency of which is removed 
from the assigned frequency by more than 250 percent of the authorized 
bandwidth: At least 43 + 10 Log10 (the mean output power in 
watts) decibels, or 80 decibels, whichever is the lesser attenuation. 
The authorized bandwidth includes the nominal radio frequency bandwidth 
of an individual transmitter/modulator in block-assigned bands. 
Equipment licensed prior to April 1, 2005 shall only be required to 
meet this standard in any 4 kHz band.
    (iii) The emission mask in paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section 
applies only to the band edge of each block of spectrum, but not to 
subchannels established by licensees. The value of P in the equation is 
the percentage removed from the carrier frequency and assumes that the 
carrier frequency is the center of the actual bandwidth used. The 
emission mask can be satisfied by locating a carrier of the subchannel 
sufficiently far from the channel edges so that the emission levels of 
the mask are satisfied. The emission mask shall use a value B 
(bandwidth) of 40 MHz, for all cases even in the case where a narrower 
subchannel is used (for instance the actual bandwidth is 10 MHz) and 
the mean output power used in the calculation is the sum of the output 
power of a fully populated channel. For block assigned channels, the 
out-of-band emission limits apply only outside the assigned band of 
operation and not within the band.
    (b) [Reserved]


Sec.  30.405  Transmitter power limitations.

    On any authorized frequency, the average power delivered to an 
antenna in this service must be the minimum amount of power necessary 
to carry out the communications desired. Application of this principle 
includes, but is not to be limited to, requiring a licensee who 
replaces one or more of its antennas with larger antennas to reduce its 
antenna input power by an amount appropriate to compensate for the 
increased primary lobe gain of the replacement antenna(s). In no event 
shall the average equivalent isotropically radiated power (EIRP), as 
referenced to an isotropic radiator, exceed the following:

                         Maximum Allowable EIRP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Frequency band (MHz)                      Fixed (dBW)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
27,500-28,350\1\........................................            + 55
38,600-40,000...........................................            + 55
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For Point-to-multipoint user stations authorized in these bands, the
  EIRP shall not exceed 55 dBw or 42 dBw/MHz.

Sec.  30.406  Directional antennas.

    (a) Unless otherwise authorized upon specific request by the 
applicant, each station authorized under the rules of this subpart must 
employ a directional antenna adjusted with the center of the major lobe 
of radiation in the horizontal plane directed toward the receiving 
station with which it communicates: provided, however, where a station 
communicates with more than one point, a multi- or omni-directional 
antenna may be authorized if necessary.
    (b) Fixed stations (other than temporary fixed stations) must 
employ transmitting and receiving antennas (excluding second receiving 
antennas for operations such as space diversity) meeting the 
appropriate performance Standard A indicated in the table to this 
section, except that in areas not subject to frequency congestion, 
antennas meeting performance Standard B may be used. For frequencies 
with a Standard B1 and a Standard B2, in order to comply with Standard 
B an antenna must fully meet either Standard B1 or Standard B2. 
Licensees shall comply with the antenna standards table shown in this 
paragraph in the following manner:
    (1) With either the maximum beamwidth to 3 dB points requirement or 
with the minimum antenna gain requirement; and
    (2) With the minimum radiation suppression to angle requirement.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                              Minimum radiation suppression to angle in degrees from centerline of main beam in
                                                                                                   Minimum                                         decibels
                                                                       Maximum beamwidth to 3 dB   antenna  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Frequency  (MHz)                       Category           points\1\  (included angle     gain                10[deg]
                                                                              in degrees)           (dbi)    5[deg] to      to     15[deg] to  20[deg] to   30[deg] to  100[deg] to  140[deg] to
                                                                                                              10[deg]    15[deg]     20[deg]     30[deg]     100[deg]     140[deg]     180[deg]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
38,600 to 40,000 \2\....................  A.........................  n/a.......................         38         25         29          33          36           42           55           55
                                          B.........................  n/a.......................         38         20         24          28          32           35           36           36
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ If a licensee chooses to show compliance using maximum beamwidth to 3 dB points, the beamwidth limit shall apply in both the azimuth and the elevation planes.
\2\ Stations authorized to operate in the 38,600-40,000 MHz band may use antennas other than those meeting the Category A standard. However, the Commission may require the use of higher
  performance antennas where interference problems can be resolved by the use of such antennas.

Sec.  30.407  Antenna polarization.

    In the 27,500-28,350 MHz band, system operators are permitted to 
use any polarization within its service area, but only vertical and/or 
horizontal polarization for antennas located within 20 kilometers of 
the outermost edge of their service area.

PART 101--FIXED MICROWAVE SERVICES

0
16. The authority citation for part 101 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  47 U.S.C. 154, 303.


Sec.  101.17   [Removed and Reserved]

0
17. Remove and reserve Sec.  101.17.


Sec.  101.56   [Removed and Reserved]

0
18. Remove and reserve Sec.  101.56.

0
19. Section 101.63 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  101.63  Period of construction; certification of completion of 
construction.

    (a) Each Station, except in Multichannel Video Distribution and 
Data Service, Local Multipoint Distribution Service, and the 24 GHz 
Service, authorized under this part must be in operation within 18 
months from the initial date of grant.
* * * * *


Sec.  101.101  [Amended]

0
20. Section 101.101, the table, is amended by removing the entries 
``27,500-28,350'' and ``38,600-40,000.''

0
21. Section 101.103 is amended by revising paragraph (g)(1) and by 
removing paragraph (i) as follows:


Sec.  101.103  Frequency coordination procedures.

* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    (1) When the transmitting facilities in a Basic Trading Area (BTA) 
are to be operated in the bands 29,100-29,250 MHz and 31,000-31,300 MHz 
and the facilities are located within 20 kilometers of the boundaries 
of a BTA, each licensee must complete the frequency coordination 
process of

[[Page 79945]]

paragraph (d)(2) of this section with respect to neighboring BTA 
licensees that may be affected by its operations prior to initiating 
service. In addition, all licensed transmitting facilities operating in 
the bands 31,000-31,075 MHz and 31,225-31,300 MHz and located within 20 
kilometers of neighboring facilities must complete the frequency 
coordination process of paragraph (d)(2) of this section with respect 
to such authorized operations before initiating service.
* * * * *


Sec.  101.107  [Amended]

0
22. Section 101.107 is amended by removing the entry ``27,500 to 
28,350'' from the table following paragraph (a).

0
23. Section 101.109 is amended by removing the entries ``27,500 to 
28,350'' and ``38,600 to 40,000'' in the table following paragraph (c) 
and revising footnote 7 to the table.
    The revision reads as follows:


Sec.  101.109  Bandwidth.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    \7\ For channel block assignments in the 24,250-25,250 MHz band, 
the authorized bandwidth is equivalent to an unpaired channel block 
assignment or to either half of a symmetrical paired channel block 
assignment. When adjacent channels are aggregated, equipment is 
permitted to operate over the full channel block aggregation without 
restriction.
* * * * *


Sec.  101.113  [Amended]

0
24. Section 101.113 is amended by removing the entries ``27,500-
28,350'' and ``38,600 to 40,000'' in the table following paragraph (a).


Sec.  101.115  [Amended]

0
25. Section 101.115 is amended by removing the entry ``38,600 to 
40,000'' in the table following paragraph (b)(2), removing footnote 14, 
and redesignating footnote 15 as footnote 14.

0
26. Section 101.147 is amended by revising the portion of paragraph (a) 
preceding the Notes, revising paragraph (t), and removing and reserving 
paragraph (v).
    The revisions read as follows:


Sec.  101.147  Frequency assignments.

    (a) Frequencies in the following bands are available for assignment 
for fixed microwave services.

928.0-929.0 MHz (28)
932.0-932.5 MHz (27)
932.5-935 MHz (17)
941.0-941.5 MHz (27)
941.5-944 MHz (17) (18)
952.0-960.0 MHz (28)
1,850-1,990 MHz (20) (22)
2,110-2,130 MHz) (1) (3) (7) (20) (23)
2,130-2,150 MHz (20) (22)
2,160-2,180 MHz (1) (2) (20) (23)
2,180-2,200 MHz (20) (22)
2,450-2,500 MHz (12)
2,650-2,690 MHz
3,700-4,200 MHz (8) (14) (25)
5,925-6,425 MHz (6) (14) (25)
6,425-6,525 MHz (24)
6,525-6.875 MHz (14) (33)
6,875-7,125 MHz (10), (34)
10,550-10,680 MHz (19)
10,700-11,700 MHz (8) (9) (19) (25)
11,700-12,200 MHz (24)
12,200-12,700 MHz (31)
12,700-13,200 (22), (34)
13,200-13,250 MHz (4) (24) (25)
14,200-14,400 MHz (24)
17,700-18,820 MHz (5) (10) (15)
17,700-18,300 MHz (10) (15)
18,820-18,920 MHz (22)
18,300-18,580 MHz (5) (10) (15)
18,580-19,300 MHz (22) (30)
18,920-19,160 MHz (5 (10) (15)
19,160-19,260 MHz (22)
19,260-19,700 MHz (5) (10) (15)
19,300-19,700 MHz (5) (10) (15)
21,200-22,000 MHz (4) (11) (12) (13) (24) (25) (26)
22,000-23,600 MHz (4) (11) (12) (24) (25) (26)
24,250-25,250 MHz
29,100-29,250 MHz (5), (16)
31,000-31,300 MHz (16)
42,000-42,500 MHz
71,000-76,000 MHz (5) (17)
81,000-86,000 MHz (5) (17)
92,000-94,000 MHz (17)
94,100-95,000 MHz (17)
* * * * *
    (t) 29,100-29,250; 31,000-31,300 MHz. These frequencies are 
available for LMDS systems. Each assignment will be made on a BTA 
service area basis, and the assigned spectrum may be subdivided as 
desired by the licensee.
* * * * *


Sec.  101.149   [Removed and Reserved]

0
27. Remove and reserve Sec.  101.149.

0
28. Section 101.1005 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  101.1005  Frequencies available.

    (a) The following frequencies are available for assignment to LMDS 
in two license blocks:

Block A of 300 MHz
    29,100-29,250 MHz
    31,075-31,225 MHz
Block B of 150 MHz
    31,000-31,075 MHz
    31,225-31,300 MHz
    (b) In Block A licenses, the frequencies are authorized as follows:
    (1) 29,100-29,250 MHz is shared on a co-primary basis with feeder 
links for non-geostationary orbit Mobile Satellite Service (NGSO/MSS) 
systems in the band and is limited to LMDS hub-to-subscriber 
transmissions, as provided in Sec. Sec.  25.257 and 101.103(h) of this 
chapter.
    (2) 31,075-31,225 MHz is authorized on a primary protected basis 
and is shared with private microwave point-to-point systems licensed 
prior to March 11, 1997, as provided in Sec.  101.103(b).
* * * * *

Subpart N--[Removed and Reserved]

0
29. Remove and reserve subpart N, consisting of Sec. Sec.  101.1201 
through 101.1209.

[FR Doc. 2016-25765 Filed 11-10-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6712-01-P