[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 129 (Monday, July 6, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 40168-40181]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-14064]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Parts 1, 2, and 101
[WT Docket Nos. 20-133, 10-153, 15-244; RM-11824, RM-11825; FCC 20-76;
FRS 16882]
Modernizing and Expanding Access to the 70/80/90 GHz Bands
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission seeks comment to explore
innovative new uses of the 71-76 GHz, 81-86 GHz, 92-94 GHz, and 94.1-95
GHz bands (collectively, the ``70/80/90 GHz bands''). In particular,
the Commission seeks comment on potential rule changes for non-Federal
users to facilitate the provision of wireless backhaul for 5G, as well
as the deployment of broadband services to aircraft and ships, while
protecting incumbent operations in the 70/80/90 GHz bands. The
Commission seeks to
[[Page 40169]]
promote expanded use of this co-primary millimeter-wave spectrum for a
myriad of innovative services by commercial industry, and in
particular, the Commission seeks to take advantage of the highly
directional signal characteristics of these bands, which may permit the
co-existence of multiple types of deployments. The Commission also
denies two requests for partial waiver of the antenna standards for the
71-76 and 81-86 GHz bands. Because this is co-primary spectrum for
Federal and non-Federal users, the Commission will coordinate any
proposed rule changes with the affected agencies and the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). This is
consistent with established practice, in that, when evaluating any band
that includes a shared allocation for Federal use, the FCC will work
with NTIA to evaluate potential impacts associated with any new or
expanded non-Federal use of shared allocations.
DATES: Comments are due on or before August 5, 2020. Reply comments on
or before September 4, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by WT Docket Nos. 20-133
and 10-153, by any of the following methods:
Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically
using the internet by accessing the ECFS: http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/.
Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must
file an original and one copy of each filing.
Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service
Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050 Junction Drive,
Annapolis Junction, MD 20701.
U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority
mail must be addressed to 445 12th Street SW, Washington, DC 20554.
Effective March 19, 2020, and until further notice, the
Commission no longer accepts any hand or messenger delivered filings.
This is a temporary measure taken to help protect the health and safety
of individuals, and to mitigate the transmission of COVID-19. See FCC
Announces Closure of FCC Headquarters Open Window and Change in Hand-
Delivery Policy, Public Notice, DA 20-304 (March 19, 2020). https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-closes-headquarters-open-window-and-changes-hand-delivery-policy.
During the time the Commission's building is closed to the
general public and until further notice, if more than one docket or
rulemaking number appears in the caption of a proceeding, paper filers
need not submit two additional copies for each additional docket or
rulemaking number; an original and one copy are sufficient.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATON CONTACT: Anthony Patrone, Broadband Division,
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, (202) 418-2428,
[email protected] or Jeffrey Tignor, Broadband Division, Wireless
Telecommunication Bureau, (202) 418 0774 [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), WT Docket Nos. 20-133; 10-153, 15-244;
FCC 20-76; RMs-11824, 11825, adopted June 9, 2020, and released June
10, 2020. The full text may also be downloaded https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-20-76A1.pdf.
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)
Synopsis
1. Background--70/80/90 GHz Bands. In the United States, the 70/80/
90 GHz bands are allocated on a co-primary basis for Federal and non-
Federal use, as follows.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Band Non-Federal Use Federal Use
------------------------------------------------------------------------
71-74 GHz....................... Fixed, Fixed Fixed, Fixed
Satellite, Satellite,
Mobile, and Mobile, and
Mobile Satellite.. Mobile Satellite.
74-76 GHz....................... Fixed, Fixed Fixed, Fixed
Satellite, Satellite, and
Mobile, Mobile.
Broadcasting, and
Broadcasting
Satellite..
81-84 GHz....................... Fixed, Fixed Fixed, Fixed
Satellite, Satellite,
Mobile, Mobile Mobile, Mobile
Satellite, and Satellite, and
Radio Astronomy.. Radio Astronomy.
84-86 GHz....................... Fixed, Fixed Fixed, Fixed
Satellite, Satellite,
Mobile, and Radio Mobile, and Radio
Astronomy.. Astronomy.
92-94 GHz, 94.1-95 GHz.......... Fixed, Mobile, Fixed, Mobile,
Radio Astronomy, Radio Astronomy,
and and
Radiolocation.. Radiolocation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. In addition, the 94-94.1 GHz segment of the band is allocated
for Federal use for Earth Exploration Satellite, Radiolocation, and
Space Research and for non-Federal use for Radiolocation. In the 71-76
GHz band (the ``70 GHz band'') and 81-86 GHz band (the ``80 GHz
band''), Fixed, Mobile, and Broadcasting services must not cause
harmful interference to, nor claim protection from, Federal Fixed-
Satellite Service operations located at 28 military installations. In
addition, in the 80 GHz band, and in the 92-94 GHz and 94.1-95 GHz
bands (collectively, the ``90 GHz band''), licensees proposing to
register links located near 18 radio astronomy observatories must
coordinate their proposed links with those observatories. Finally, the
adjacent 86-92 GHz band is allocated for Earth Exploration-Satellite
(passive), Space Research (passive), and Radio Astronomy services.
Given that the allocations for these bands include Federal and non-
Federal use, the Commission will follow established practices in
coordinating with NTIA prior to adopting any new or revised rules in
this proceeding that would affect Federal users.\1\ In 2003, the
Commission established service rules for non-Federal use of the 70/80/
90 GHz bands through a two-pronged, non-exclusive licensing regime.\2\
Under the first prong, an entity may apply for a nationwide, non-
exclusive license for
[[Page 40170]]
the entire 12.9 gigahertz of the 70/80/90 GHz bands, which serves as a
prerequisite to satisfying the second prong. Under the second prong, a
licensee may operate links after completing coordination with Federal
operations through NTIA's database \3\ and after providing an
interference analysis to one of the third-party database managers.
Licensees are afforded first-in-time priority for successfully
registered links relative to subsequently registered links. Non-Federal
licensees may use the 70/80/90 GHz bands for any point-to-point, non-
broadcast service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Communications Act charges the Commission with the
licensing and regulation of commercial and private spectrum use, 47
U.S.C. 151, 301, while NTIA has been delegated authority over radio
stations ``belonging to and operated by the United States.'' 47
U.S.C. 305(a); 47 U.S.C. 902(b)(2)(A) (delegating authority to
regulate government radio stations to NTIA). The Commission and NTIA
coordinate their respective spectrum management responsibilities
pursuant to a Memorandum of Understanding, with the goal of
promoting the efficient use of the radio spectrum in the public
interest. Memorandum of Understanding Between the Federal
Communications Commission and the National Telecommunications and
Information Administration, at 1 (Jan. 31, 2003), https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-230835A2.pdf.
\2\ Allocations and Service Rules for 71-76 GHz and 92-95 GHz
Bands, WT Docket No. 02-146, Report and Order, 18 FCC Rcd 23318,
23322, para. 5 (2003) (70/80/90 GHz Report and Order).
\3\ If a proposed link does not interfere with existing Federal
operations then it is given a ``green light;'' if it may interfere
with existing Federal operations, then it is given a ``yellow
light,'' indicating that further coordination is necessary. 47 CFR
101.1523; 70/80/90 GHz Report and Order, 18 FCC Rcd at 23342-43,
para. 54; Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Announces Licensing and
Interim Link Registration Process, Including Start Date for Filing
Applications for Non-Exclusive Nationwide Licenses in the 71-76 GHz,
81-86 GHz, and 92-95 GHz Bands, WT Docket No. 02-146, Public Notice,
19 FCC Rcd 9439, 9447 (WTB 2003). The ``green light''/``yellow
light'' system protects the sensitive nature of the locations of
military installations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The Commission periodically has reviewed the service rules
governing the 70/80/90 GHz bands. For example, in 2005, the Commission
modified several of its technical rules, including interference
protection criteria, antenna characteristics, band segmentation, and
power spectral density.\4\ In 2012, the Commission sought input on
whether modifications of the Commission's antenna standards applicable
to a number of microwave bands (including the 70/80/90 GHz bands) would
promote wireless backhaul use. In the 2016 Spectrum Frontiers
proceeding, the Commission sought comment on whether to authorize
flexible-use services, including mobile, in the 70/80/90 GHz bands, but
it ultimately declined to do so.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Allocations and Service Rules for the 71-76 GHz, 81-86 GHz,
and 92-95 GHz Bands, WT Docket No. 02-146, Memorandum Opinion and
Order, 20 FCC Rcd 4889, 4905, para. 34 (2005) (70/80/90 GHz
Reconsideration Order). The current service rules governing the 70/
80/90 GHz bands are in 47 CFR 101.1501-101.1527, in addition to
other operative subparts of part 101. Unlicensed devices operating
in the 92-95 GHz band are governed by part 15 of the Commission's
rules. This Notice of Proposed Rulemaking does not contemplate
changes to the part 15 rules. See 47 CFR 15.257.
\5\ Use of Spectrum Bands Above 24 GHz for Mobile Radio
Services, Second Report and Order, Second Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, order on Reconsideration, and memorandum Opinion and
Order, 32 FCC Rcd 10988, 11054, para.200 (2017) (2017 Spectrum
Frontiers Second Report and Order). The Commission reserved the
right to reconsider mobile use in the 70/80/90 GHz bands as the
technology develops. 2017 Spectrum Frontiers Second Report and
Order, 32 FCC Rcd at 11054, para. 201.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Use of spectrum in the 70/80/90 GHz bands is primarily
concentrated along a few routes, with minimal use in large parts of the
United States. As of March 23, 2020, there were 658 active non-
exclusive nationwide licensees in the 70/80/90 bands. Based upon
information available from the third-party database managers
responsible for registering links in those bands, as of March 23, 2020,
there were 18,770 registered fixed links \6\ in the 70 GHz and 80 GHz
bands.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ A link in this context is defined as a communication path
between one location and another in a single direction. Multiple
channels registered between the same transmit and receive location
are considered separate links. Bi-directional communications are
also counted as separate links.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Rule Modifications Proposed by Parties. Several parties
supporting expanded use of the 70/80/90 GHz bands propose changes to
the rules governing the bands. The Fixed Wireless Communications
Coalition (FWCC) proposes several changes to the Commission's part 101
rules governing the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands. In particular, FWCC asks
for the following rule modifications: (1) Allow smaller antennas for
fixed point-to-point operations; (2) permit alternate polarization for
antennas; (3) prevent the accumulation of never-built links in the
registration database and allow certain amendments to registrations;
and (4) adopt a channel plan for the bands. In particular, FWCC
contends that the use of smaller antennas will support the provision of
backhaul for emerging 5G services using higher frequency bands. Because
of short-distance propagation in these bands, FWCC asserts that
backhaul facilities will be deployed in neighborhoods and communities,
and must be smaller, lower-cost, and more aesthetically pleasing than
the antennas permitted under the current rules. T-Mobile, Nokia, and 5G
Americas have supported FWCC's proposals for smaller antenna sizes in
the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands. Several parties support the accommodation
of smaller antennas for 5G backhaul. Additionally, the 5G Wireless
Backhaul Advocates support changes to the link registration system to
prevent the accumulation of never-constructed links in the system. FWCC
and the 5G Backhaul Advocates note that Canada and other countries have
rules that permit smaller antennas in the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands.
6. In 2019, Aeronet Global Communications, Inc. (Aeronet) filed
petitions for rulemaking that sought to permit the use of ``Scheduled
Dynamic Datalinks'' (SDDLs) to provide broadband service to aircraft or
ships in motion in the 70/80/90 GHz bands. Aeronet indicates that its
technology would configure and maintain, in real time, multiple
networks involving a variety of point-to-point links between nodes,
including ground stations, relay nodes, ships, and aircraft. Aeronet
asserts that it would use ground or shore stations to transmit narrow
beams towards known flight paths or ship routes without causing
interference to existing point-to-point links authorized in the bands.
The initial connected aircraft or ship also could serve as a conduit
through which broadband service could reach other aircraft or ships
within a specified area through a sub-mesh network. As Comsearch notes,
Aeronet's links for aviation would operate between ground stations and
aircraft, and between aircraft; Aeronet's links for maritime would
operate between shore stations and ships, between shore stations and
aerostats, between aerostats and ships, and between ships. In its 2019
petitions for rulemaking, Aeronet contends that its operations could
``further mitigate any risk of interference'' to not only mobile and
terrestrial users of the spectrum for 5G backhaul but also to ``Federal
FSS operations located at the 28 military bases'' and the 18 Federal
radio astronomy observatories. Aeronet requests that the Commission
modify its part 101 rules to authorize SDDLs as a ``fixed service''
that can operate in the 70/80/90 GHz bands and to increase the
transmitter power limits that would apply to these operations.
7. In response to the Commission's Public Notice seeking comment on
Aeronet's petitions,\7\ several parties expressed general support for
changes to the rules applicable to the 70/80/90 GHz bands provided that
any changes do not foreclose other future uses of the bands. Other
commenters opposed Aeronet's proposal or argued that the Commission
should consider all proposed changes in the 70/80/90 GHz bands in a
comprehensive proceeding. Several parties raised concerns about the
potential co-existence of multiple services specifically in the 90 GHz
band. Nearly all commenters indicated a need for more information about
how
[[Page 40171]]
Aeronet's proposed system would work, and Aeronet subsequently placed
additional information in the record. In developing the record on the
Aeronet petitions, several commenters suggested alternative uses for
the 70/80/90 GHz bands.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Aeronet Global Communications Inc.'s Petition for Rulemaking
to Amend the Commission's Allocation and Service Rules for the 71-76
GHz, 81-86 GHz, and 92-95 GHz Bands to Authorize Aviation Scheduled
Dynamic Datalinks, Public Notice, Report No. 3112, CG RM-11824
(2019); Aeronet Global Communications Inc.'s Petition for Rulemaking
to Amend the Commission's Allocation and Service Rules for the 71-76
GHz, 81-86 GHz, and 92-95 GHz Bands to Authorize Maritime Scheduled
Dynamic Datalinks, Public Notice, Report No. 3113, CG RM-11825
(2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discussion
8. The Commission proposes targeted changes to its rules to promote
additional wireless backhaul for 5G, in furtherance of the Commission's
goals of expanding access to broadband and fostering the efficient use
of millimeter-wave spectrum in the public interest. Specifically, the
Commission proposes changes to the antenna standards applicable to the
70 GHz and 80 GHz bands and seeks comment on whether similar changes
are necessary in the 90 GHz band. The Commission seeks comment on
whether the Commission should make changes to its current link
registration rules for the 70/80/90 GHz bands to eliminate never-
constructed links from the database. The Commission also proposes to
authorize point-to-point links to endpoints in motion in the 70 GHz and
80 GHz bands and to classify those links as a ``mobile'' service. The
Commission seeks comment on any technical and operational rules that
would be needed to allow these new service offerings in the 70 GHz and
80 GHz bands and to mitigate interference to incumbents and other
proposed users of these bands and in adjacent bands. Finally, the
Commission seeks comment on whether the Commission should adopt a
channelization plan in the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands.
9. 5G Backhaul--Antenna Rules. The Commission proposes a number of
changes to the antenna standards for the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands to
provide greater flexibility in deploying 5G wireless backhaul. The
Commission observed that smaller, lighter antennas are less susceptible
to sway and less visually obtrusive than larger antennas, which would
make them ideal for 5G network densification. The Commission seeks to
leverage these characteristics of smaller antennas to promote 5G
deployment, while protecting incumbent uses of these bands and
providing opportunities for other innovative uses of these bands.
10. The Commission's rules currently apply a single category of
antenna standards to the 70 GHz band and the 80 GHz band. The
Commission proposes to increase the maximum beamwidth by 3 dB points,
from 1.2 degrees to 2.2 degrees. Additionally, the Commission proposes
to reduce minimum antenna gain from 43 dBi to 38 dBi and to retain the
proportional EIRP reduction requirement. The Commission seeks comment
on these proposals. Both FWCC and the 5G Wireless Backhaul Advocates
argue that these proposed changes are critical to deploying nationwide
5G wireless backhaul and fostering network densification. The
Commission notes that adoption of these changes would harmonize its
rules with Canada's rules, which could facilitate economies of scale in
equipment deployment in North America.
11. The Commission also proposes reducing the co-polar and cross-
polar discrimination requirement applicable to 70 GHz and 80 GHz
antennas.\8\ Co-polar and cross-polar discrimination requirements were
established to facilitate coordination of multiple links that share the
same frequency path. FWCC contends that some of the smaller, lighter
antennas its members contemplate using cannot meet the existing
requirement. Recognizing that small cell backhaul applications will not
involve shared high-capacity paths, the Commission seeks comment on
whether its current stricter co-polar and cross-polar discrimination
requirements are now unnecessary. Do commenters agree that operators
needing relatively short-distance links for small-cell backhaul will
not require high-capacity shared paths? The Commission notes that the
5G Wireless Backhaul Advocates suggest eliminating the co-polar
discrimination requirement entirely.\9\ The Commission seeks comment on
this suggestion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See FWCC April 4th Ex Parte at 2 as amended by FWCC March
24th Ex Parte at 1-2. Currently, at angles between 1.2 and 5 degrees
from the centerline of the main beam, co-polar discrimination must
be G-28, where G is the antenna gain in dBi; and at angles of less
than 5 degrees from the centerline of main beam, cross-polar
discrimination must be at least 25 dB. See 47 CFR 101.115(b)(2)
n.15. FWCC proposes that magnitude of co-polar discrimination
requirement be reduced from G-28 dB to G-33 dB and only apply
between 2.5 and 5 degrees from the centerline of the main beam and
that the cross-polar discrimination requirement be reduced from 25
dB to 21 dB. FWCC April 4th Ex Parte at 2 as amended by FWCC March
24th Ex Parte at 1-2.
\9\ 5G Wireless Backhaul Advocates Ex Parte at 2 (noting that
``FWCC has suggested a modification to the specification below 5
[degrees] to accommodate 38 dBi antennas, seeking to achieve a
similar affect, rather than our proposal to remove the requirement
altogether'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. In addition, the Commission seeks comment on FWCC's
recommendation that it allows +/- 45 degree polarization (also known as
slant polarization) in the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands. Section 101.117 of
the Commission's rules generally limits licensees to horizontal or
vertical polarization. The Commission seeks comment on FWCC's
contention that flat plate antennas generally have cleaner azimuth/
elevation radiation pattern envelopes when used in slanted
polarization. Would slant polarization aid coordination at congested
points in the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands? Should the Commission consider
slant polarization in the 90 GHz band? The Commission seeks comment on
any disadvantages of allowing slant polarization. The Commission asks
commenters to provide data on the benefits and costs of any proposed
changes.
13. Some commenters have suggested that adopting a second category
of antenna standards would promote flexibility in the 70 GHz and 80 GHz
bands. The Commission's rules for many other services regulated under
part 101 allow for two categories of antennas, Category A and Category
B; Category A performance standards are more stringent than Category B.
The Commission seeks comment on whether to adopt an additional antenna
standard--Category B--applicable to the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands, which
could permit less restrictive use under certain circumstances than the
Commission's proposed modified antenna standards (which would be the
accompanying Category A standards). The Commission seeks comment on the
advantages and disadvantages of adopting Category A and Category B
standards in the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands. Should the new Category B
standards permit use of even smaller, wider beamwidth antennas, or
other less restrictive uses? \10\ Under what circumstances should use
of such antennas be permitted? Would such changes promote investment in
these bands? In other bands, if a station using a Category B antenna
causes interference that cannot be eliminated by lowering EIRP, the
station must upgrade to a Category A antenna to eliminate the
interference. Should the Commission adopt similar rules or other
conditions of use here? What impact, if any, should changing from one
antenna standard to the other have on a registrant's first-in-time
status? Commenters proposing alternative standards should provide a
detailed justification for those standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ For example, FWCC proposes that Category B antennas would
have the same maximum beamwidth and minimum antenna gain as Category
A antennas but would have a lower minimum radiation suppression
requirement. See FWCC Ex Parte at Appx. i.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. With respect to the Commission's proposed modifications to the
antenna standards for the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands, or any alternate
proposals by commenters, the Commission seeks
[[Page 40172]]
detailed, quantitative data on the relative likely benefits and costs.
Such data should include information on cost savings that could result
from the changes, as well as increased costs that would result from an
increase in interference.
15. The Commission notes that the Commission's antenna standards
for the 90 GHz band are considerably different from those that apply to
the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands.\11\ While advocates for changes to the
Commission's antenna standards for the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands does not
propose changes to the standards for the 90 GHz band, the Commission
seeks comment on whether any of the changes discussed in this NPRM or
other changes should apply to the 90 GHz band.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ For example. the standards for the 90 GHz band do not
distinguish between co-polar and cross-polar standards. The 90 GHz
standards also set a narrower maximum beamwidth and lower minimum
antenna gain. 47 CFR 101.115(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. Finally, the Commission seeks comment on how the proposed
changes to the antenna standards for the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands, as
well as any changes to the antenna standards for the 90 GHz band, would
affect existing Federal operations in these shared bands, including the
Radiolocation service. The Commission also seeks comment on how changes
to the antenna standards would impact the system for coordination
between Federal and non-Federal users. In addition, the Commission
seeks comment on how changing the antenna standards may affect future
uses of these bands, including for Fixed-Satellite Service.
17. Link Registration Processes. The Commission seeks comment on
whether the Commission should make changes to the current link
registration rules in the 70/80/90 GHz bands. The 5G Wireless Backhaul
Advocates and FWCC propose requiring licensees to certify that their
registered links are constructed as required. When the Commission
adopted service rules for the 70/80/90 GHz bands, it shortened the
construction requirement generally applicable to other part 101
services. Licensees in the 70/80/90 GHz bands must complete
construction and bring into regular use registered links within 12
months of the date on which a third-party database manager registers
the link. Currently, the Commission relies on licensees to notify
database managers to withdraw unconstructed links from the database.
FWCC alleges that the current registration process encourages licensees
to submit multiple registrations at various locations and heights for a
single transmit site, ``seeking priority protection while not yet
knowing precisely where their equipment will be deployed.'' The 5G
Wireless Backhaul Alliance contends that requiring licensees to certify
that their links have been constructed at the end of the 12th month
construction period, or when they seek to renew their license, would
improve ``database hygiene.''
18. Do commenters agree that certain licensees submit multiple
registrations at various locations and heights for a single transmit
site? If so, does the Commission need to adopt rule revisions to
require that each registration satisfies the interference-protection
requirements of section 101.1523(b)(2)--including as to the licensee's
other current or pending registrations? Do commenters agree that there
are registrations in the database that are not operational and likely
never will be? If so, how common are such inaccurate registrations? The
Commission note that failure to begin operations in a timely manner
pursuant to a part 101 authorization results in the automatic
cancelation of the authorization. Nevertheless, because the Commission
currently does not require licensees to file a construction
certification, such cancellations are not automatically reflected in
ULS or the third-party database, and the Commission therefore does not
have a ready mechanism for accurately tracking them.\12\ Should the
Commission require 70 GHz and 80 GHz band registrants to file a
certification of construction when a link has been placed in operation?
If so, when should the Commission require registrants to file the
certifications? Should certifications be filed when the links become
operational, at any time prior to the expiration of the construction
deadline, or whenever a licensee seeks to renew its license? Should
different rules apply for registrants in the 90 GHz band? What changes,
if any, should the Commission make to its rules to ensure that
registrations accurately reflect actual use of the 70/80/90 GHz bands?
Should the Commission adopt rules to promote competition and prevent
licensees from filing multiple, duplicative registrations that dilute
the accuracy of the database and potentially foreclose use of the band
from competitors or additional, future uses? If so, how should those
rules be structured?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ FWCC Ex Parte at 5 (citing 47 CFR 101.63(c)). Micronet's
database provides information about links that have been registered
and not constructed, but there is no requirement that Micronet
provide this information and there is no requirement that licensees
inform Micronet when links are built. Therefore, links that appear
in Micronet's database as unconstructed may be constructed. See
Micronet Database, http://www.micronetcommunications.com/LinkRegistration/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. If the Commission does adopt a construction certification
requirement, how should the Commission manage the certification
process? The Commission seeks comment on FWCC's suggestion that
certificates be managed through ULS or by a third party. Should the
Commission accept construction certifications through one of its
systems (e.g., ULS) and pass the certification on to the third-party
database administrators? Or should registrants file certifications with
the third-party database administrators directly? Should
certifications, whether filed in ULS or with database managers, be
based on FCC Form 601 Schedule K (Schedule for Required Notifications
for Wireless Services) or would a checkmark certification--under
penalty of perjury--suffice? Would a directive to the database managers
to remove registrations from the database if no certification is filed
within 12 months be appropriate? Should the Commission require
licensees to list registrations that are beyond the construction
deadline as part of their renewal applications, and--for each
registration--either certify the link's construction and operation or
identify the link for removal from third-party databases? What
penalties, if any, should the Commission impose for failure to comply
with a certification requirement if the Commission adopt one? Should
failure to timely begin operations result in license forfeitures or
other penalties? What are the costs and benefits resulting from a
construction certification requirement, including potential one-time
costs for existing licensees to certify links that have been
constructed prior to the certification requirement and projected costs
from links that would need to be certified in the future?
20. FWCC also proposes that the Commission allow registrants to
amend their registrations under certain circumstances without losing
their first-in-time priority rights. The Commission seeks comment on
whether licensees should be allowed to amend their registered links
without losing first-in-time status. What amendments, if any, should be
allowed without losing first-in-time status?
21. Communications to Ships and Aircraft--Authorization and
Framework. The Commission proposes to authorize point-to-point links to
endpoints in motion in the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands under its part 101
rules. The Commission agrees with Aeronet that authorizing these links
in the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands can benefit
[[Page 40173]]
consumers by meeting an increasing demand for broadband services that
can be accessed on aircraft and ships, and that using highly
directional signals in these bands has the potential to avoid
interference to other point-to-point links.
22. Provision of Broadband to Ships and Planes. The aviation and
maritime markets are currently underserved by broadband providers.
According to one study by the London School of Economics,\13\
approximately 3.8 billion passengers fly annually across the globe,
with only around 25% of planes offering some form of on-board
broadband--often of variable quality, coverage, speed, or capacity.
According to another study, aviation-based internet access service has
an adoption (or take) rate of 10% or less, due to a combination of
factors, such as high prices, intermittent coverage, poor performance,
and difficult payment mechanisms.\14\ Similarly, broadband connectivity
on-board passenger ships has been characterized as ``notoriously
difficult,'' because broadband internet access service provided at sea
``has been patchy, slow, expensive, and [ ] mainly a luxury associated
with premium packages.'' \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Alexander Grous, London School of Economics and Political
Science, Sky High Economics Chapter One: Quantifying the Commercial
Opportunities of Passenger Connectivity for the Global Airline
Industry 3 (2017), http://www.lse.ac.uk/business-and-consultancy/consulting/assets/documents/sky-high-economics-chapter-one.pdf (last
visited Mar. 18, 2020).
\14\ Peter Lemme, Seamless Air Alliance, The Profitable
Economics of Inflight Connectivity 7 (Mar. 2019), https://www.seamlessalliance.com/wp-content/uploads/Seamless-Whitepaper-07.pdf (last visited Mar. 18, 2020).
\15\ Eva Grey, The Race for Faster WiFi on Board Cruise Ships,
Ship Technology (May 15, 2018), https://www.ship-technology.com/features/race-faster-wifi-board-cruise-ships/ (last visited Mar. 18,
2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
23. Different systems or services operating at different altitudes
or unique locations could create opportunities for expanded use (or
reuse) of spectrum frequencies as between traditional terrestrial
locations and unique altitudes and locations. Stated another way,
``3D'' spectrum management techniques could allow for the deployment of
new broadband products and services while helping to alleviate growing
demands for spectrum resources. Innovative products and services are
being developed specifically to improve broadband access on-board
airplanes, ships, and other methods of transport. A 3D model of
spectrum management, however, presents not only potential opportunities
but also potential challenges, as managing potential harmful
interference between systems becomes more complicated.
24. The 70/80/90 GHz bands could provide a unique spectrum resource
for the provisioning of broadband services to airplanes, ships, and
other antennas in motion. In general, atmospheric attenuation tends to
increase the higher the signal goes in the radio spectrum frequency
range, limiting the potential length of transmission paths. The 70/80/
90 GHz bands, however, experience less attenuation than frequencies
lower down in the 50-60 GHz range.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See Lou Frenzel, Millimeter Waves Will Expand The Wireless
Future, ElectronicDesign (Mar. 6, 2013), https://www.electronicdesign.com/communications/millimeter-waves-will-expand-wireless-future (last visited Sept. 11, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
25. The Commission notes that, in response to Aeronet's petitions,
several commenters have raised concerns specific to proposed systems
that would operate in the 90 GHz band. Sierra Nevada, for example,
opposes use of the 90 GHz band for the types of operations proposed by
Aeronet. Sierra Nevada believes these systems will interfere with the
Enhanced Flight Visions Systems (EFVS) for which Sierra Nevada seeks to
establish rules in this segment of the band. In addition, the
Commission proposed to permit use of the 92-95.5 GHz band for EFVS,
including amending the Table of Allocations to add a Radionavigation
Service allocation in this segment of the band. Moog opposes Aeronet's
use of the 90 GHz band because it may interfere with Moog's proposed
Foreign Object Debris (FOD) Detection System. The Commission note that
the 92-100 GHz band is also recognized worldwide for FOD radar use.
Aeronet has acknowledged that the 90 GHz band may pose unique
coordination problems for the services it intends to deploy. Because
the deployment of links to endpoints in motion in the 90 GHz band may
present some unique coordination problems--particularly to EFVS systems
that the Commission has already proposed to allow in the 92-95.5 GHz
band--the Commission propose to authorize these links to or from (or
between) endpoints in motion only in the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands. The
Commission seeks comment on this proposal.
26. The Commission seeks to develop a record on the balance of
benefits and costs of permitting new uses of the 70 GHz and 80 GHz
bands for communications to points in motion. The Commission seeks
comment on the types of benefits to consumers of the services to
aircraft and ships proposed by Aeronet. For example, the Commission
seeks comment on the value of enhanced competition in the aeronautical
and maritime broadband markets that could result from authorizing
Aeronet's operations and similar types of services in the 70 GHz and 80
GHz bands. Should the Commission adopt rules to promote competition and
prevent licensees from filing multiple registrations that result in a
bevy of first-in-time registrations that potentially foreclose use of
the band from competitors?
27. How would the introduction of these new types of services in
the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands affect existing point-to-point microwave
services or the potential for deployment of other non-Federal and
Federal services in the bands? Would aeronautical or maritime
deployments, such as the ones proposed by Aeronet and other parties in
this proceeding be compatible with more robust use of the band for
small cell backhaul, as proposed by FWCC, Ericsson, Nokia, and others?
If particular non-Federal use cases are not compatible, then how should
the Commission weigh the various public interest considerations in
allowing, prohibiting, or prioritizing among such uses? Would
aeronautical or maritime deployments in these bands inhibit use of this
spectrum by Fixed-Satellite Service systems?
28. The Commission also notes that there are both Federal and non-
Federal space-service frequency allocations in the bands discussed
here; fixed satellite, mobile satellite, broadcasting satellite, Earth
Exploration-Satellite (passive) and radio astronomy. In addition, there
are primary Federal allocations in adjacent bands for earth
exploration-satellite (passive), space research (passive), and radio
astronomy services in the 86-92 GHz band. The Commission seeks comment
on any possible impact that the proposals discussed in this NPRM may
have on Federal use of the 70/80/90 GHz bands by these services.
29. Classification of Service. The Commission proposes to classify
links to endpoints in motion as a ``mobile'' service under the existing
mobile allocation for the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands. Aeronet asserts that
its systems would be ``almost fixed'' because they are ``a forecasted
series of fixed point-to-point broadband links'' and ``[t]he location
of any given node at any given moment would be knowable in advance and
known in real time.'' Aeronet further asserts that links to endpoints
in motion could be authorized as fixed services by adding: (1)
Definitions in the part 101 rules for ``Scheduled Dynamic Datalink,''
``Maritime Scheduled Dynamic Datalink,'' ``Aviation Scheduled Dynamic
Datalink,'' and
[[Page 40174]]
``Scheduled Dynamic Datalink Relay;'' and (2) a note to the relevant
frequency assignments specified in Sec. 101.147 of the Commission's
rules. The Commission tentatively conclude, however, that the
appropriate service classification for Aeronet's proposed services, if
the Commission decide to authorize air- and sea-based links or links
between antennas in motion in the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands, should be
``mobile.'' The Commission seeks comment on this tentative conclusion.
30. Aeronet's proposed service classification appears to be
inconsistent with the language of the Communications Act and the
Commission's rules. While the Communications Act does not define
``fixed stations'' or ``fixed service,'' the Commission rules provide
that ``fixed stations'' are stations in the fixed service, which is
defined in its rules as a ``radiocommunication service between
specified fixed points.'' Aircraft and ships must be in motion to serve
their intended purposes, and the Commission tentatively concludes that
transmission of signals to endpoints on aircraft and ships does not
become communication to fixed points simply because, as Aeronet
suggests, the expected locations of the aircraft or ships may be known
or specified before movement begins. In contrast, the Communications
Act defines the term ``mobile station'' to mean ``a radio-communication
station capable of being moved and which ordinarily does move.'' The
Commission's rules include a similar definition of mobile stations.
Moreover, the Commission's rules define ``aeronautical mobile service''
as a ``mobile service between aeronautical stations and aircraft
stations, or between aircraft stations . . .'' The Commission rules
similarly define ``maritime mobile service'' as a ``mobile service
between coast stations and ship stations, or between ship stations . .
.''
31. The Commission tentatively conclude that the definitions of
``mobile station'' in the Communications Act and its rules and of
``aeronautical mobile service'' and ``maritime mobile station'' in its
rules are consistent with Aeronet's descriptions of its service.
Aeronet's antennas on-board aircraft appear to fit most closely within
the definition of aircraft stations operating in the aeronautical
mobile service, while the ground stations in its system appear to fit
the definition of aeronautical stations. Antennas operating on ships
appear to fit the description of ship stations operating in the
maritime mobile service, while the ground stations and aerostats meet
the definition of coast stations. The Commission seek comment on these
tentative conclusions.
32. The Commission notes that it's revisiting the Commission's
decision in the 2017 Spectrum Frontiers Order (83 FR 37, 52-53 (Jan. 2,
2018)) not to allow mobile service in the 70/80/90 GHz bands, given the
evolution in technology. In the 2017 Spectrum Frontiers Order, the
Commission acknowledged that companies, including Aeronet, Google, and
The Elefante Group, proposed different uses of the 70/80/90 GHz bands
``which neither fit the traditional mobile broadband nor fixed link
models,'' but it determined that the Commission should consider these
proposals and possible future uses in its Wireless Backhaul proceeding.
The Commission did, however, reserve the right to revisit this issue as
mobile deployments increased in other millimeter-wave bands, as
technology developed, and as frameworks for mobile and fixed services
to coexist in the bands came to light. Nearly two years later, in
February 2019, Aeronet filed its petitions for rulemaking, and in May
2019 Comsearch submitted its compatibility study. Based on this
additional information now before the Commission, the Commission
consider Aeronet's proposal in conjunction with the targeted rule
changes set forth in this NPRM to allow for expanded wireless backhaul.
33. The Commission additionally seeks comment on whether any
changes to Aeronet's proposed definitions would be necessary to
accommodate a classification of these services as mobile, and whether
any changes would be necessary to create a provider- and technology-
neutral framework for the provision of air- and sea-based links or
links between antennas in motion.
34. Coordination, Licensing, and Registration. The Commission seeks
comment on what changes to the 70/80/90 GHz coordination, licensing,
and registration framework would be necessary to permit the operation
of links to endpoints in motion under part 101. Currently, non-
exclusive nationwide licensees in the 70/80/90 GHz bands coordinate
point-to-point links with Federal and other non-Federal users on a
first-in-time basis using a coordination mechanism managed by NTIA and
shared databases managed by several third-party managers. As an initial
matter, the Commission proposes to continue licensing use of the 70 GHz
and 80 GHz bands on a non-exclusive, nationwide basis, to the extent
the Commission authorize links to endpoints in motion in these bands.
This type of flexible licensing approach could facilitate multiple
types of uses in these bands, provided that an appropriate Federal
coordination and non-Federal registration framework is in place. The
Commission seeks comment on this proposal.
35. In that regard, the Commission proposes to require coordination
and registration of all air- and sea-based links/links between antennas
in motion, and the Commission seeks comment on this proposal. Aeronet
asserts that its links involving ground or shore stations can be
registered using the existing coordination framework for the 70/80/90
GHz bands, with minor modifications to the registration databases to
represent multi-dimensional polygons and polyhedrons, as well as narrow
beam-width antennas that operate within a wider-beamwidth cone. Aeronet
further represents that links that do not involve a ground or shore
station--links between aircraft, links between ships, and links between
relay nodes and ships--do not need to be registered at all if Aeronet
adopts reasonable limitations on its operations to manage exposures to
Fixed Service receivers. The Commission tentatively concludes that
coordination and registration should include not only links involving
ground or shore stations, but also links between aircraft, links
between ships, and links between relay nodes and ships. Requiring
appropriate coordination and registration of all links would facilitate
protection of Federal and non-Federal operations under the coprimary
allocation and allow for future coordination among similar deployments,
if additional entrants seek to offer competing services in the 70/80/90
GHz bands. Further, appropriate coordination and registration
requirements would potentially allow NTIA and the Commission to track
and evaluate the construction and use of all links in the event of
interference issues, to the extent the Commission adopts the
construction certification requirements proposed in this NPRM. The
Commission seeks comment on this tentative conclusion.
36. The Commission seeks comment on how these links could be
coordinated and registered to represent multi-dimensional areas or
polyhedrons, which would involve a significant transformation of NTIA's
and the Commission's current systems that coordinate and register two-
dimensional point-to-point links. For example, should the coordination
and registration requirements for aircraft-to-aircraft links differ
depending on the altitude of one or both of the respective aircrafts?
How wide should the beams be represented
[[Page 40175]]
to account for the potential for aircraft or ships to vary their
routes? Will there be any effects from allowing parties to coordinate
and register links for wider beams than they potentially may use?
Should the databases distinguish between registration of ``phantom''
widebeam antennas such as Aeronet proposes to use to represent the
multi-dimensional coverage of ground or shore stations, and wider
beamwidth antennas actually used to provide service, as contemplated in
this NPRM? How should the construction requirements in Sec. 101.63(b)
of the Commission's rules, which govern Fixed Service links on a link-
by-link basis, apply to the various elements of Aeronet's system that
are registered or not registered? Are different construction
requirements necessary? The Commission seeks comment on how to address
any other technical challenges related to updating the current
information technology systems that coordinate and register two-
dimensional links to a system that can coordinate and register three-
dimensional polyhedrons.
37. Even if aircraft-to-aircraft or ship-to-ship links do not
require an interference analysis of traditional Fixed Service links,
how would coordination and registration work in the event the 70/80/90
GHz bands are used by multiple air-based or ship-based systems? Should
first-in-time priority be afforded to multidimensional areas, and if
so, what effect would that have on competing uses of the bands? Is the
existing, static third-party database system sufficient to accommodate
links to endpoints in motion, or would a more robust coordination and
registration mechanism be needed to accommodate services like those
Aeronet seeks to deploy? How would coordination and registration
mechanisms accommodate Aeronet's proposed operations, which would
involve the transmission of signals towards known flight paths or ship
routes according to a specified schedule? What are the additional costs
and benefits of modifying the coordination and registration framework
and associated systems as necessary in light of Aeronet's proposal?
38. In light of the importance of a modified coordination and
registration framework to the successful expansion of use of the 70 GHz
and 80 GHz bands, the Commission proposes to require FCC review and
approval of third-party database managers with the capability of
accepting coordination data for air- and sea-based links/links between
antennas in motion as a condition precedent to deployment. Currently,
two companies (Comsearch and Micronet Communications) serve as third-
party database administrators for registering 70/80/90 GHz band links.
When the Commission designated database administrators in 2004, it
required administrators to monitor and implement FCC rules and policies
(including any changes) pertaining to the 70/80/90 GHz bands. Would the
undertakings included in the Designation Order require the current
administrators to make any changes necessary to accommodate air- and
sea-based links or links between antennas in motion?
39. Further, the Commission seeks comment on how to continue to
protect co-primary and adjacent Federal operations if the Commission
authorize links to endpoints in motion. What changes would be needed to
NTIA's ``green light''/``yellow light'' coordination system to
accommodate deployment of air- or sea-based links, or links between
antennas in motion? How would the system effectively manage
coordination of commercial aircraft-to-aircraft and aircraft-to-ground
links with Federal operations, including the Earth Exploration-
Satellite (passive), Space Research (passive), and Radio Astronomy
Services?
40. In addition, the Commission notes that certain commenters,
while expressing support for Aeronet's proposal, assert that changes to
the part 101 rules should be flexible enough to permit other new uses
of the 70/80/90 GHz bands. The Commission seeks comment on whether
changes to its 70/80/90 GHz rules, including any new definitions,
should encompass a broader array of new services. The Commission also
seek comment on whether any alternate licensing frameworks would be
more effective in facilitating expanded use of these bands.
41. Technical and Operational Rules. To facilitate provision of its
proposed service, Aeronet requests a change in the maximum allowable
mobile Equivalent Isotropically Radiated Power (EIRP) for 71-76 GHz and
81-86 GHz from +55 dBW to +57 dBW. Aeronet also requests that, for
purposes of SDDL operation, the Commission increase the maximum
transmitter power from 3 watts (5 dBW) to 5 watts (7 dBW) and the
maximum transmitter power spectral density from 150 mW per 100 MHz to
500 mW per 100 MHz. Aeronet claims that its proposed services otherwise
fit within the current rules for use of the 70/80/90 GHz bands. The
Commission seeks comment on whether to increase the maximum allowable
EIRP, the maximum transmit power, and the maximum power spectral
density applicable to the 70/80/90 GHz bands. What are the potential
costs and benefits of increasing the power limits in the 70/80/90 GHz
bands, including to existing licensees in those bands or in adjacent
bands? The Commission note that vehicular radars operate in the
adjacent 76-81 GHz band and the Commission seek comment on whether
Aeronet's proposed uses and technical rules would increase the
potential for harmful interference to these vehicular radars. Earth
Exploration-Satellite (passive) and Space Research (passive) services
operate in the adjacent 86-92 GHz band. The Commission seeks comment on
whether Aeronet's proposed uses and technical rules would increase the
potential for harmful interference to these adjacent band vehicular
radars and passive services, and if there is a potential for
interference, what technical or operational mechanisms should be
considered to mitigate it? The Commission seeks comment on whether
changes to other technical or operational rules would be warranted to
accommodate the deployment of links to endpoints in motion in the 70/
80/90 GHz bands. For example, would rule changes be needed to promote
the security of communications to and from aircraft and ships in
motion?
42. In addition, the Commission seeks comment on whether the
interference mitigation measures proposed by Aeronet and Comsearch
would be sufficient to protect co-primary Federal services and, if so,
whether they should be required by its part 101 rules. For Aeronet's
proposed aviation system, Aeronet would employ ground stations located
``away from urban and suburban areas where part 101 fixed service use
of the 70/80/90 GHz bands is concentrated'' and would use a minimum
elevation angle of five degrees at the ground stations. Comsearch
indicates that Aeronet's ground stations may require coordination zones
of up to 35 kilometers. Aeronet also would use aircraft-to-aircraft
links that, according to the Comsearch Report, would pose little
interference risk to fixed links when operating near horizontally
because they can only intersect the main-beam of FS receivers ``at very
low or negative elevation angles and at large distances.''
43. For Aeronet's maritime system, the Comsearch Report proposes a
coordination zone for ship-to-shore communications of up to 30
kilometers to alleviate the risk of interference, and it recommends
frequency planning to avoid ``co-channel operation.'' The Comsearch
Report indicates that there is little risk of interference to fixed
links from links from shore station-to-
[[Page 40176]]
aerostat, aerostat-to-shore station, aerostat-to-ship, and ship-to-ship
links because these links would be located at least 20 kilometers out
to sea and the antenna beamwidth for links to ships would be directed
away from land. Comsearch asserts that shore station-to-aerostat and
aerostat-to-shore station links could be registered as ordinary fixed
point-to-point links because the aerostats would be tethered and move
within +/- 135 meters laterally and -11 meters vertically. For ship-to-
ship links and aerostat-to-ship links, the Comsearch Report proposes
mitigation measures such as a minimum offshore distance or a minimum
off-axis angle towards land.
44. The Commission seeks comment on whether the mitigation measures
Comsearch advocates would be necessary or sufficient to protect fixed
point-to-point users. The Commission also seeks comment on what
additional interference mitigation measures, if any, would be necessary
to protect other operations, including vehicular radars, passive
services, and the Radio Astronomy Service. Should the Commission amend
its part 101 rules to require such measures if SDDLs or other links to
endpoints in motion are deployed in these bands? What restrictions or
unique operating parameters, if any, should the Commission adopt to
mitigate the risk of harmful interference? How far away from
traditional fixed stations would ground stations need to be located to
avoid interference? What degree of elevation angle would be sufficient
to prevent interference? What mitigation measures would be effective to
address the risk of harmful interference potentially caused by
aircraft-to-aircraft links between aircraft operating at significantly
different altitudes? Would other entities be able to operate similar
systems without receiving interference from or causing interference to
Aeronet's system? In considering these issues, the Commission seeks
comment on what assumptions should be made about the number of airports
and seaports where SDDLs or similar services would be deployed.
45. Channelization Plan. The Commission seeks comment on FWCC's
request that the Commission develops a channel plan for the 70 GHz and
80 GHz bands. Supporters of adopting a channelization plan should
provide a specific description of changes since the Commission
eliminated the 1.25 gigahertz segments in 2005 that necessitate
development of a channel plan. Is existing equipment, which has been
deployed or is being sold, compatible with FWCC's proposal to adopt a
channel plan? Can existing equipment be reprogrammed to conform to a
channel plan or would major modifications or replacement be necessary?
Would establishing a channel plan restrict the development of
innovative equipment for the bands, as the Commission feared in 2005?
Alternatively, does the increasing use of these bands justify FWCC's
concerns about potential interference that may result due to the
absence of a channel plan, particularly in light of FWCC's proposal to
loosen antenna standards? Should the Commission, in light of these
factors, also consider a channel plan in the 90 GHz band?
46. Commenters should also address whether authorizing links to
endpoints in motion requires the Commission to adopt a formal channel
plan for the 70/80/90 GHz bands. For example, should the Commission
limit SDDL operations to receive (uplink) operations in the 80 GHz band
to protect Radio Astronomy Service systems?\17\ The Table of Frequency
Allocations notes that, in the 76-86 GHz band, emissions from airborne
stations can be particularly serious sources of interference to the
Radio Astronomy Service. In the event the Commission adopts a
channelization plan, should the Commission continue to apply the
standard emission limit rules in Sec. 101.1011 (which use a formula
for limiting OOBE at the edge of the bandwidth in use, as opposed to
subchannels), or does the Commission need to adopt additional or
different rules to accommodate a formal channel plan for the 70/80/90
GHz bands or the rule changes requested by Aeronet, FWCC, and others?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ In the context of SDDL service, ``uplink'' means ground-to-
air, shore-to-ship, and shore-to-aerostat. Aeronet Aviation Petition
at 28; Aeronet Maritime Petition at 26.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
47. If the Commission was to adopt a channel plan, then what
channel plan should it use? Should the Commission allow for multiple
operators to transmit or receive signals in opposite directions (i.e.,
air-to-ground versus ground-to-air) in the same spectrum? Parties
advocating for a formal channel plan or specific designations should
explain why a particular band (e.g., 70 GHz or 80 GHz) is more suitable
for uplink versus downlink for the advocated-for designations. If the
Commission adopts a channel plan, how should it take into account the
various new uses of the bands proposed in this NPRM? Should the
Commission revise Sec. 101.109(c) of its rules to specify a maximum
bandwidth less than 5,000 megahertz for the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands?
Should the Commission increase the minimum bit rate of 0.125 bits per
second per Hertz to, for example, 1 bit per second per Hertz? Would any
specific channel plan and direction of service be particularly
conducive to protecting the other co-primary services from
interference? Should the Commission adopt a minimum loading requirement
before a licensee will be assigned an additional channel? What other
changes would be necessary or appropriate to accommodate a
channelization plan? Lastly, what are the costs and benefits of
adopting channel plans?
48. Other Considerations. The Commission seeks comment on whether
changes to any other part 101 service rules would be needed to
accommodate the various service offerings and potential rule changes
examined in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. For example, could
existing microwave links, new small cell backhaul applications, and
links to endpoints in motion coexist in the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands?
Would increasing maximum allowable EIRP and increasing maximum output
power, as proposed by Aeronet, affect the ability to deploy smaller
antennas in the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands? Would relaxing the antenna
standards for the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands affect the viability of new
and innovative proposed uses in these bands?
49. In addition, the Commission notes that Sec. 101.1(b) describes
the purpose of the rules in part 101 as ``prescrib[ing] the manner in
which portions of the radio spectrum may be made available for private
operational, common carrier, 24 GHz Service and Local Multipoint
Distribution Service fixed, microwave operations that require
transmitting facilities on land or in specified offshore coastal areas
within the continental shelf.'' Similarly, Sec. 101.215 of the
Commission's rules requires that, except for remote stations using
certain frequencies, ``[e]ach licensee shall post at the station the
name, address and telephone number of the custodian of the station
license or other authorization if such license or authorization is not
maintained at the station.'' Are revisions to these rules (or others)
necessary or advisable to accommodate the services contemplated in this
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking? If the Commission authorize links to
endpoints in motion as a mobile service, what other rule changes would
be necessary to accommodate that change?
50. Are any other rule changes necessary to accommodate other
potential uses of the 70/80/90 GHz bands? For example, Loon is
developing a High-Altitude Platform Station (HAPS) service that may use
the 70/80/90 GHz
[[Page 40177]]
bands to provide ``balloon-powered internet access to unserved and
underserved communities.'' Similarly, Elefante seeks to use the 70 GHz
and 80 GHz bands to provide 5G and internet-of-Things backhaul. Could
these uses co-exist with existing co-primary uses of the band as well
as the new uses discussed in this NPRM? Would any other rule changes
help to promote innovative use of the 70/80/90 GHz bands?
51. In addition, the Commission proposes that any mobile operations
be authorized on a non-interference basis to fixed operations in Canada
and Mexico and subject to future international agreements. The
Commission seeks comment on the international coordination implications
of the services proposed in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. Would
the separation/coordination zones defined in the rules for terrestrial
Fixed Service, which are based on certain characteristics for
terrestrial operations (such as EIRP and antenna height), be sufficient
to prevent interference to services in neighboring countries from an
aeronautical or maritime service operating with different parameters?
What mechanisms should be in place with regard to operation in or over
quiet zones and/or near international borders with Canada and Mexico?
52. The Commission notes that any systems for the provision of
broadband that it authorize in this proceeding must not create hazards
to air navigation, whether near airports, over water, or in any other
area. The Commission seeks comment on any necessary rule changes to
promote public safety. For example, should any Commission rules, such
as those on tower lighting, apply to relay stations, including
aerostats or drones?
53. Wavier Petitions. Aviat Networks and CBF Networks, Inc.
Petitions. Aviat Networks, Inc. (Aviat) and CBF Networks, Inc., d/b/a
Fastback Networks (Fastback), each filed a request for partial waiver
of the antenna standards for the 71-76 and 81-86 GHz bands
(collectively, the Waiver Requests). The relief requested is consistent
with FWCC's previously proposed changes to the Commission's antenna
rules, and the Waiver Requests acknowledge that any relief granted
would be subject to the outcome of any ``rulemaking proceeding
affecting 71-76/81-86 GHz antenna standards.'' On October 13, 2015, the
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau consolidated the Waiver Requests and
sought comment on them. Several commenters support approval of the
waiver petitions, while others oppose them or seek to expand their
applicability.
54. Generally, the Commission may waive any rule for good cause
shown. Waiver is appropriate if special circumstances warrant a
deviation from the general rule, such deviation will serve the public
interest, and the waiver does not undermine validity of the general
rule. More specifically, Sec. 1.925(b)(3) of the Commission's rules
requires parties seeking a waiver of wireless radio services licensing
rules to demonstrate that: (i) The underlying purpose of the rule(s)
would not be served or would be frustrated by application to the
instant case, and that a grant of the requested waiver would be in the
public interest; or (ii) in view of unique or unusual factual
circumstances of the instant case, application of the rule(s) would be
inequitable, unduly burdensome or contrary to the public interest, or
the applicant has no reasonable alternative.
55. Aviat and Fastback have not met the first prong of Sec.
1.925(b)(3) because they have not shown that the requested waivers
would be in the public interest. Specifically, as discussed in this
NPRM, there are multiple and complex issues to be explored before
allowing antennas that do not satisfy the current requirements of Sec.
101.115. The Commission, therefore, also decline suggestions to grant
an industry-wide waiver. Moreover, Aviat and Fastback do not meet the
second prong of Sec. 1.925(b)(3) because the record does not establish
that waivers are justified based on special circumstances. In short,
while the Commission agrees that FWCC's proposed changes to the antenna
rules merit full consideration, Aviat and Fastback have not justified
the need for individual waivers prior to the Commission developing a
full record on the proposed rule changes. The Commission concludes that
the public interest is best served through a thorough and deliberate
examination of the possibility of revising antenna and other rules in
the 70/80/90 bands through the rulemaking process rather than on an
individual basis.
Procedural Matters
56. Ex Parte Presentations--Permit-but-disclose. The proceedings
shall 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 rule 1.1206(b).
In proceedings governed by rule 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 s 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.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
57. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as
amended (RFA), the Commission has prepared this 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 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). Written public
comments are requested on this IRFA. Comments must be identified as
responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines for comments
as specified in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. The Commission will
send a copy of the NPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA). In addition, the
NPRM and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be published in the Federal
Register.
58. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules. In the NPRM,
the Commission explores various proposals seeking to change its part
101 rules to permit innovative uses of the 71-76 GHz, 81-86 GHz, 92-94
GHz, and 94.1-95 GHz bands, collectively referred to as
[[Page 40178]]
the ``70/80/90 GHz bands.'' The potential rule changes seek to
facilitate the provision of wireless backhaul for 5G, as well as the
deployment of broadband services to aircraft and ships, while
protecting incumbent operations in the 70/80/90 GHz bands. Further, in
promoting the expanded use of this millimeter-wave spectrum for a
myriad of innovative services, the Commission seeks to take advantage
of the highly directional signal characteristics of these bands which
may permit the co-existence of multiple types of deployments.
59. The 70/80/90 GHz bands are high millimeter-wave bands allocated
for co-primary Federal and non-Federal uses in the FS, FSS (70/80 GHz
only), Mobile (70/80/90 GHz), Radio Astronomy (80/90 GHz only) and
Radiolocation (90 GHz only) services under part 101 of the Commission's
Rules. Spectrum use in the 70/80/90 GHz bands is primarily concentrated
along a few popular routes, with minimal use in large parts of the
United States. These bands are presently used primarily for fixed
point-to-point and satellite services via non-exclusive registered
links in a third-party registration database. As of March 23, 2020,
there were 658 active non-exclusive nationwide licensees in the 70/80/
90 bands. Based upon information available from the third-party
database managers responsible for registering links in those bands, as
of March 23, 2020, there were 18,770 registered fixed links in the 70
GHz and 80 GHz bands. To further the Commission's goals of expanding
access to broadband and fostering the efficient use of millimeter wave
spectrum, the Commission proposes targeted changes to its rules to
facilitate the provision of wireless backhaul for 5G and seek comment.
Included in the Commission's discussion of potential rule changes and
requests for comments in NPRM are proposed changes to its rules in the
70/80/90 GHz bands by the Fixed Wireless Communications Coalition
(FWCC), the 5G Wireless Backhaul Advocates and Aeronet Global
Communications, Inc. (Aeronet).
60. Specifically, the Commission proposes changes to the antenna
standards applicable to the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands and seeks comment
on whether similar changes are necessary in the 90 GHz band. The
Commission also proposes to continue licensing use of the 70 GHz and 80
GHz bands on a non-exclusive, nationwide basis, to the extent the
Commission authorizes links to endpoints in motion in these bands and
seek comment on this proposal. The Commission further proposes to
require registration of all air and sea-based links/links between
antennas in motion, and the Commission seeks comment on this proposal.
In addition, the Commission seeks comment on whether the Commission
should make changes to its current link registration rules for the 70/
80/90 GHz bands to prevent the registration of never-constructed links.
The Commission also proposes to authorize point-to-point links to
endpoints in motion in the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands and to classify
those links as a ``mobile'' service. The Commission seeks comment on
technical and operational rules necessary to facilitate these new
service offerings in the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands and mitigate
interference to incumbents and other proposed users of these bands.
Finally, the Commission seeks comment on whether the Commission should
adopt a channelization plan in the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands.
61. By modifying the Commission's rules and implementing policies
designed to provide for more flexible use of new technologies in the
70/80/90 GHz band, the Commission hopes to 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.
62. Legal Basis. The proposed action is authorized pursuant to
Sec. Sec. 4, 303, and 307 of the Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 307.
63. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to
Which the Proposed Rules Will Apply. The RFA directs agencies to
provide a description of and, where feasible, an estimate of the number
of small entities that may be affected by the proposed rules, 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.
64. Small Businesses, Small Organizations, Small Governmental
Jurisdictions. The Commission's actions, over time, may affect small
entities that are not easily categorized at present. The Commission
therefore describe here, at the outset, three broad groups of small
entities that could be directly affected herein. First, while there are
industry specific size standards for small businesses that are used in
the regulatory flexibility analysis, according to data from the SBA's
Office of Advocacy, in general a small business is an independent
business having fewer than 500 employees. These types of small
businesses represent 99.9% of all businesses in the United States which
translates to 30.7 million businesses.
65. Next, the type of small entity described as a ``small
organization'' is generally ``any not-for-profit enterprise which is
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.''
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) uses a revenue benchmark of $50,000
or less to delineate its annual electronic filing requirements for
small exempt organizations. Nationwide, for tax year 2018, there were
approximately 571,709 small exempt organizations in the U.S. reporting
revenues of $50,000 or less according to the registration and tax data
for exempt organizations available from the IRS.
66. Finally, the small entity described as a ``small governmental
jurisdiction'' is defined generally as ``governments of cities,
counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special
districts, with a population of less than fifty thousand.'' U.S. Census
Bureau data from the 2017 Census of Governments indicate that there
were 90,056 local governmental jurisdictions consisting of general-
purpose governments and special purpose governments in the United
States. Of this number there were 36,931 general purpose governments
(county, municipal and town or township) with populations of less than
50,000 and 12,040 special purpose governments--independent school
districts with enrollment populations of less than 50,000. Accordingly,
based on the 2017 U.S. Census of Governments data, the Commission
estimate that at least 48,971 entities fall into the category of
``small governmental jurisdictions.''
67. Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite). This
industry comprises establishments engaged in operating and maintaining
switching and transmission facilities to provide communications via the
airwaves. Establishments in this industry have spectrum licenses and
provide services using that spectrum, such as cellular services, paging
services, wireless internet access, and wireless video services. The
appropriate size standard under SBA rules is that such a business is
small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. For this industry, U.S.
Census Bureau data for 2012 show that there were 967 firms that
operated for the entire year. Of this total, 955 firms
[[Page 40179]]
had employment of 999 or fewer employees and 12 had employment of 1,000
employees or more. Thus under this category and the associated size
standard, the Commission estimates that the majority of wireless
telecommunications carriers (except satellite) are small entities.
68. Fixed Microwave Services. Microwave services include common
carrier, private-operational fixed, and broadcast auxiliary radio
services. They also include the Upper Microwave Flexible Use Service,
the Millimeter Wave Service, Local Multipoint Distribution Service
(LMDS), the Digital Electronic Message Service (DEMS), and the 24 GHz
Service, where licensees can choose between common carrier and non-
common carrier status. There are approximately 66,680 common carrier
fixed licensees, 69,360 private and public safety operational-fixed
licensees, 20,150 broadcast auxiliary radio licensees, 411 LMDS
licenses, 33 24 GHz DEMS licenses, 777 39 GHz licenses, and five 24 GHz
licensees, and 467 Millimeter Wave licenses in the microwave services.
The Commission has not yet defined a small business with respect to
microwave services. The closest applicable SBA category is Wireless
Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite). The appropriate size
standard for this category under SBA rules is that such a business is
small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. For this industry, U.S.
Census Bureau data for 2012 show that there were 967 firms 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 SBA category and the associated standard, the Commission
estimates that the majority of fixed microwave service licensees can be
considered small.
69. The Commission does not have data specifying the number of
these licensees that have more than 1,500 employees, and thus is unable
at this time to estimate with greater precision the number of fixed
microwave service licensees that would qualify as small business
concerns under the SBA's small business size standard. Consequently,
the Commission estimates that there are up to 36,708 common carrier
fixed licensees and up to 59,291 private operational-fixed licensees
and broadcast auxiliary radio licensees in the microwave services that
may be small and may be affected by the rules and policies adopted
herein. The Commission note, however, that the microwave fixed licensee
category includes some large entities.
70. Satellite Telecommunications. This category comprises firms
``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.'' Satellite
telecommunications service providers include satellite and earth
station operators. The category has a small business size standard of
$35 million or less in average annual receipts, under SBA rules. For
this category, U.S. Census Bureau data for 2012 show that there was a
total of 333 firms that operated for the entire year. Of this total,
299 firms had annual receipts of less than $25 million. Consequently,
the Commission estimate that the majority of satellite
telecommunications providers are small entities.
71. All Other Telecommunications. The ``All Other
Telecommunications'' category is comprised of 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.''
The SBA has developed a small business size standard for ``All Other
Telecommunications,'' which consists of all such firms with gross
annual receipts of $35 million or less. For this category, U.S. Census
Bureau data for 2012 show that there was a total of 1,442 firms that
operated for the entire year. Of these firms, a total of 1400 firms had
gross annual receipts of under $25 million and 42 firms had gross
annual receipts of $25 million to $49, 999,999. Thus, the Commission
estimates that a majority of ``All Other Telecommunications'' firms
potentially affected by its actions can be considered small.
71. Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications
Equipment Manufacturing. 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 established a size standard for
this industry of 1,250 employees or less. U.S. Census Bureau data for
2012 show that 841 establishments operated in this industry in that
year. Of that number, 828 establishments operated with fewer than 1,000
employees, 7 establishments operated with between 1,000 and 2,499
employees and 6 establishments operated with 2,500 or more employees.
Based on this data, the Commission conclude that a majority of
manufacturers in this industry is small.
72. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements. The Commission expect the rule proposals in
the NPRM may impose new or additional reporting or recordkeeping and/or
other compliance obligations on small entities as well as on other
licensees and applicants if adopted. In particular, proposed
requirements involving licensing, registration, and construction
certification could increase recordkeeping and reporting obligations
for small entities and for other licensees and applicants. There may
also be new compliance obligations created by antenna standard changes,
and changes to part 101 technical and/or operational rules in order to
accommodate proposed new service offerings and other potential uses of
the 70/80/90 GHz bands. The Commission believes at this time that
applying the rules equally to all entities would promote fairness.
73. In the NPRM, the Commission is considering adopting rules with
the goal of preventing one party from filing a bevy of coordination
requests, choking-off the band from competitors. The Commission propose
requiring registrants in the 70/80/90 GHz bands to file such
certificates of construction, through either ULS or a third party, when
a link has been placed into operation. As it currently stands, failure
to timely begin operations pursuant to part 101 authorization results
in the authorization cancelling automatically, however, the Commission
has no way of knowing whether operation has begun without a requirement
to file a construction certificate. The NPRM seeks comment on whether
the Commission should also require licensees to list registrations
under their licenses that are beyond their construction deadlines as
part of their renewal applications, and--for each registration--either
certify the link's construction and use or to identify the link for
removal from the third-party
[[Page 40180]]
databases. While filing such construction certificates or requiring the
listing of registrations with missed construction deadlines with third-
party database administrators may appear to increase the paperwork
burden on all affected entities, strict construction requirements may
actually reduce the overall number of filings to only those that
entities would actually build.
74. The record in this proceeding contains assertions that the
innovative aeronautical and maritime services proposed by Aeronet have
lower interference potential and therefore could avoid the need to
engage in the proposed registration process described above. If this
becomes the Commission's approach, it would lower the recordkeeping
burden on small entities and other licensees. However, to the extent
such links would also be coordinated though the current registration
system, the recordkeeping burden associated with such new services
would presumably remain the same as the burden on legacy systems in the
70/80/90 GHz bands. There are various methods of interference
mitigation that could be applicable to the newly proposed services,
such as the use of coordination zones or frequency planning which may
also place a greater recordkeeping burden on licensees operating these
services. However, if new services are able to operate without causing
interference to competitors' systems, and existing mitigation
techniques remain effective, then related compliance costs may not
increase. In the NPRM, the Commission seeks comment on the various
proposals and considerations.
75. When the Commission first reduced the minimum antenna standard,
the Commission did so as a matter of public policy to expand potential
use in the bands to more business locations. In the past, the cost of
the 70 GHz and 80 GHz antennas were specifically noted as major factors
limiting deployment in the 70/80/90 GHz band. As mentioned in the NPRM,
the antennas mandated in the 70/80/90 GHz bands can cost up to eight
times as much as smaller antennas. The FWCC's proposal to permit even
smaller antenna designs, could result in more small entities using the
band. To the extent such new antenna standards would increase
interference between antennas, it is also possible that higher levels
of coordination and hence recordkeeping would be essential. However,
the Commission does not believe that the costs and/or administrative
burdens associated with these rules would unduly burden small entities
or other licensees. In the NPRM, the Commission seeks comment on these
proposals and considerations.
76. The NPRM notes that certain part 101 rules need modification,
such as the requirement ``[e]ach licensee shall post at the station the
name, address and telephone number of the custodian of the station
license or other authorization if such license or authorization is not
maintained at the station.'' The Commission asks commenters how to
apply this rule (if at all), to stations on-board aircraft or ships or
HAPS. In the absence of any modifications, this rule would create a
recordkeeping obligation for operators of newly proposed services.
77. At this time, Commission is not currently in a position to
determine whether, if adopted, the proposed rules and associated
requirements raised in the NPRM would require small entities to hire
attorneys, engineers, consultants, or other professionals and cannot
quantify the cost of compliance with the potential rule changes and
compliance obligations raised herein. In the Commission's discussion of
these proposals in the NPRM, the Commission have sought comments from
the parties in the proceeding, and requested cost and benefit analyses,
which may help the Commission identify and evaluate relevant matters
for small entities, including any compliance costs and burdens that may
result in the proceeding.
78. Steps Taken to Minimize the Significant Economic Impact on
Small Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered. The RFA
requires an agency to describe any significant, specifically small
business, alternatives for small businesses that it has considered in
reaching its proposed approach, which may include the following four
alternatives (among others): (1) The establishment of differing
compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into
account the resources available to small entities; (2) the
clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance and
reporting requirements under the rule for such small entities; (3) the
use of performance rather than design standards; and (4) an exemption
from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for such small
entities.
79. To assist with the Commission's evaluation of the economic
impact on small entities, and to better evaluate options and
alternatives should there be a significant economic impact on small
entities as a result of the proposals in this NPRM, the Commission has
sought comment from the parties. The proposals in this proceeding for
expanded use in the 70/80/90 bands are predicted on Aeronet's petitions
for rulemaking to permit the use of SDDLs to enable the provision of
broadband service to aircraft or ships in motion. However, alternative
uses for the band were raised by commenters on the Aeronet petitions.
Sierra Nevada seeks to use the 90 GHz band for Enhanced Flight Vision
Systems to allow aircraft to land in low-visibility conditions.
Elefante seeks to use the 70 GHz and 80 GHz bands for feeder links in
its proposed Stratospheric-Based Communications Service. Loon intends
to use a network of balloons at heights of about 20 kilometers to
provide internet access unserved and underserved communities. Moog
intends to use spectrum in the 90 GHz band for its proposed Foreign
Object Debris Detection System to help airplanes avoid hazards on
runways. Additionally, as mentioned above, FWCC proposes several
changes to the Commission's part 101 rules governing the 71-76 GHz and
81-86 GHz bands. To facilitate further consideration of the various use
proposals, in the NPRM the Commission seeks comments on how to weigh
public interest considerations associated with allowing, prohibiting
and prioritization of uses and on the costs and benefits of allowing
new uses of the 70/80/90 GHz bands for communications to points in
motion. The Commission also seeks comment on whether changes to the 70/
80/90 GHz licensing framework would be necessary to accommodate the
operation of links to endpoints in motion under part 101.
80. In light of FWCC's proposed changes to the 70 GHz and 80 GHz
antenna standards, the Commission seeks comments and alternatives for
changing the antenna standards in 70/80/90 GHz bands. The Commission
believe that reducing the minimum antenna size will facilitate access
to spectrum by a wide variety of small entities at a cost that is
substantially less than the antennas currently mandated for the 70/80/
90 GHz bands. The Commission seeks detailed quantitative data on the
benefits and costs of relaxing antenna standards for the 70/80 GHz
bands which may allow the Commission to analyze the impact on small
entities. This includes any cost savings from the changes and any cost
increases that may result from increased interference. In the NPRM,
Commission queries whether to require 70 GHz and 80 GHz band
registrants to file a certification of construction when a link has
been placed into operation in response to FWCC's proposed changes to
the Commission's rules for link registration in the 70/80 GHz bands and
[[Page 40181]]
seeks comments on these matters. The Commission also queries what
penalties should be imposed for failure to comply with a certification
requirement, if adopted, and whether license forfeitures or other
penalties should be imposed for failure to timely begin operations and
seeks comments.
81. The Commission expects to more fully consider the economic
impact and alternatives for small entities following the review of
comments and costs and benefits analyses filed in response to the NPRM.
The Commission's evaluation of this information will shape the final
alternatives it considers, the final conclusions it reaches, and any
final actions it ultimately takes in this proceeding to minimize any
significant economic impact that may occur on small entities.
82. Federal Rules that May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict with the
Proposed Rules. None.
83. Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis. This Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking may contain new or modified information
collection(s) subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. If the
Commission adopts any new or modified information collection
requirements, it will be submitted to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for review under section 3507(d) of the PRA. OMB, the
general public, and other federal agencies are invited to comment on
the new or modified information collection requirements contained in
this proceeding. In addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork
Relief Act of 2002, the Commission seeks specific comments on how the
Commission might ``further reduce the information collection burden for
small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.''
Ordering Clauses
84. Accordingly, it is ordered that, pursuant to sections 4(i) and
(j), 303, and 307 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47
U.S.C. 154(i), (j), 303, 307, and 47 CFR 1.407, the petitions for
rulemaking filed by Aeronet, RM-11824 and RM-11825, are granted as
discussed herein, and this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in WT Docket
No. 20-133 is adopted.
85. It is further ordered that the Commission's Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a
copy of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, including the Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of
the Small Business Administration (SBA).
86. It is further ordered, pursuant to sections 4(i) -(j) of the
Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), (j), and Sec. 1.925 of
the Commission's rules, that the Request for Waiver of Aviat Networks,
Inc. filed on April 5, 2013, as amended on March 24, 2014; and on
November 10, 2014 (to add Radio Frequency Systems as a party), and the
Request for Waiver of CBF Networks, Inc. d/b/a Fastback Networks, filed
on June 19, 2015, are denied. If no petitions for reconsideration are
timely filed, WT Docket No. 15-244 is terminated, and its docket shall
be closed.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-14064 Filed 7-2-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P