[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 70 (Wednesday, April 12, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 21944-21960]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-07214]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 2 and 25

[GN Docket No. 23-65, IB Docket No. 22-271; FCC 23-22; FR ID 134735]


Single Network Future: Supplemental Coverage From Space; Space 
Innovation

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission 
(Commission) adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would 
facilitate the integration of satellite and terrestrial networks by 
proposing a new regulatory framework for Supplemental Coverage from 
Space (SCS). Through this novel approach, satellite operators 
collaborating with terrestrial service providers would be able to 
obtain Commission authorization to operate space stations on currently 
licensed, flexible-use spectrum allocated to terrestrial services. This 
would enable expanded coverage to a terrestrial licensee's subscribers, 
especially in remote, unserved, and underserved areas, and would 
increase the availability of emergency communications.

DATES: Interested parties may file comments on or before May 12, 2023; 
and reply comments on or before June 12, 2023.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by GN Docket No. 23-65 
and IB Docket No. 22-271, 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.

[[Page 21945]]

    Filings can be sent by commercial overnight courier, or by first-
class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All filings must be 
addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary, 
Federal Communications Commission.
     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 45 L Street NE, 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.
    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).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information on this 
proceeding, contact Melissa Conway of the Wireless Telecommunications 
Bureau, Mobility Division, at (202) 418-2887 or [email protected], 
or Merissa Velez of the International Bureau, Satellite Division, at 
(202) 418-0751 or [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice 
of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in GN Docket No. 23-65, IB Docket No. 22-
271; FCC 23-22, adopted on March 16, 2023 and released on March 17, 
2023. The full text of this document is available for public inspection 
online at https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-23-22A1.pdf.

Synopsis

    1. In this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), the Commission 
facilitates the integration of satellite and terrestrial networks by 
proposing a new regulatory framework for Supplemental Coverage from 
Space (SCS). Through this novel approach, satellite operators 
collaborating with terrestrial service providers would be able to 
obtain Commission authorization to operate space stations on currently 
licensed, flexible-use spectrum allocated to terrestrial services, thus 
expanding coverage to the terrestrial licensee's subscribers, 
especially in remote, unserved, and underserved areas. This framework 
could play a key role towards fulfilling Commission goals that include 
facilitating ubiquitous wireless coverage across the nation; expanding 
the availability of emergency communications to consumers and the 
geographic range of first responders to provide emergency services; and 
promoting competition in the provision of wireless services to 
consumers.
    2. There is an evolving trend of partnerships between satellite 
service providers and terrestrial wireless service providers to 
facilitate this type of enhanced capability. Some collaborations rely 
on the use of spectrum currently allocated to satellite services to 
provide expanded service options to subscribers. A growing number of 
satellite companies are seeking to partner with mobile service 
providers to provide mobile satellite services through interoperable 
technologies. Such an approach proposes to rely on satellite operators 
using spectrum currently allocated for terrestrial mobile service that 
is exclusively-licensed to terrestrial service providers and subject to 
an existing terrestrial service regulatory framework, and therefore 
requires further Commission action to enable satellite use. Some 
satellite-terrestrial collaborations have requested waivers of various 
Commission rules in part 25 and the United States Table of Frequency 
Allocations (U.S. Table) to implement their proposed service. Other 
companies have received Commission authority to test communications 
between satellites and mobile devices.

A. Adding a Co-Primary Mobile-Satellite Service Allocation to Certain 
Bands Allocated to Terrestrial Services

    3. Given the complexity of this undertaking, and particularly due 
to technical considerations, we confine our initial proposal to 
spectrum and locations where (1) there is only a single terrestrial 
entity that holds, either directly or indirectly, all co-channel 
licenses for the relevant frequencies in a given geographically 
independent area (GIA); and (2) there are no primary, non-flexible-use 
legacy incumbent operations (whether federal or non-federal) in the 
band. We seek comment on potentially extending our proposed framework 
to a range of alternative licensing scenarios.
    4. Specifically, the Commission proposes to add a non-federal 
footnote to the U.S. Table authorizing mobile-satellite service 
operations on a co-primary basis with existing allocations in a number 
of terrestrial flexible-use bands. We propose to add the footnote 
allocation in bands where we are aware of at least one block of the 
band with an incumbent terrestrial licensee that holds all co-channel 
licenses throughout a GIA, sufficient to satisfy our proposed entry 
criteria. Under this proposal, the footnote would be used in each 
relevant band in lieu of adding a mobile-satellite service listing 
(i.e., a ``direct table entry''). We seek comment on whether the 
proposed footnote allocation should be on a secondary basis as opposed 
to a co-primary basis. We also seek comment on adding direct 
allocations to the U.S. Table for the mobile-satellite service on a co-
primary basis in the applicable bands and creating an associated 
footnote that would limit such use to SCS operations.
    5. The flexible-use terrestrial bands for which we propose at this 
time to add a non-federal mobile-satellite service footnote allocation 
are: 600 MHz: 614-652 MHz and 663-698 MHz; 700 MHz: 698-758 MHz, 775 
MHz-788 MHz, and 805-806 MHz; 800 MHz: 824-849 MHz and 869-894 MHz; 
Broadband PCS: 1850-1915 MHz and 1930-1995 MHz; AWS-H Block: 1915-1920 
MHz and 1995-2000 MHz; and WCS: 2305-2320 MHz and 2345-2360 MHz. We 
believe these flexible-use terrestrial bands can benefit from provision 
of SCS because commercial wireless services have been deployed on these 
bands and because the bands include at least one spectrum block with an 
existing licensee that holds rights sufficient to provide the basis for 
a satellite applicant to satisfy our proposed entry criteria. We seek 
comment on the inclusion of each band (or block within a band) in our 
proposed framework. We also seek comment generally on this approach and 
any alternative methods of selecting bands that may be better suited to 
achieving the Commission's goals as set forth in this NPRM, or any 
additional bands that commenters believe should be included in our 
proposal. For example, we seek comment on whether to include within the 
SCS framework certain 700 MHz spectrum dedicated to public safety use.
    6. We seek comment on whether we should adopt a footnote allocation 
that would permit mobile satellite use to communicate with fixed, as 
well as mobile, devices, and on whether we should expressly include an 
allocation for the proposed bands authorizing fixed-satellite service 
(FSS) operations in an SCS context or whether, as

[[Page 21946]]

proposed, we should only adopt a mobile-satellite service (MSS) 
allocation for those bands.
    7. To inform our review of the overall record, commenters should 
indicate the flexible-use bands in which they are currently, or are 
interested in, testing SCS capabilities. We seek comment on the status 
of such testing and prospective timelines for each proposed band. We 
also ask commenters to identify the type of communication contemplated, 
e.g., voice, SOS/emergency communications, texting, service to Internet 
of Things (IoT) devices, 4G/5G broadband, as well as the type of 
technology or infrastructure needed to support such use.

B. Closing Terrestrial Service Area Coverage Gaps Through Supplemental 
Coverage From Space

    8. We propose initially to limit our SCS framework to non-
geostationary satellite orbit (NGSO) operators with an existing part 25 
license or an existing part 25 grant of market access (for non-U.S. 
licensed satellite operators) (together, ``authorization''), because 
such satellite operators are likely to rapidly deploy these space 
stations after receiving any needed modification to their existing 
authorizations to implement SCS. We believe that proposing this initial 
step presents the fewest practical and technical complexities and 
provides the most efficient path for enabling SCS in the near-term.
    9. Geographically Independent Area. To minimize the possibility for 
interference between geographically adjacent markets, we propose, as an 
initial step in this proceeding, to limit the provision of supplemental 
coverage from space to instances where a single terrestrial licensee 
holds all co-channel licenses in the relevant band throughout one of 
six GIAs. The proposed GIAs are: (1) the contiguous United States 
(CONUS); (2) Alaska; (3) Hawaii; (4) American Samoa; (5) Puerto Rico/
U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI); and (6) Guam/Northern Mariana Islands. 
Notably, there are no Commission licensed land areas adjacent to each 
proposed GIA, and there is a significant geographic separation between 
GIAs. By applying these proposed criteria to satellite use of 
terrestrial spectrum, we seek to ensure that collaborating satellite 
and terrestrial licensees may provide SCS without the presence in each 
GIA of co-channel terrestrial licensees requiring interference 
protection. We seek comment on this proposal, including the associated 
costs and benefits.
    10. Assigning New Mobile-Satellite Service Rights for Supplemental 
Coverage from Space. To effectuate SCS in certain flexible-use bands 
allocated solely for terrestrial use, we propose to authorize mobile 
satellite operations (downlink/space-to-Earth and uplink/Earth-to-
space) in these bands (when newly allocated for such use) by allowing 
an NGSO satellite operator with an existing part 25 authorization to 
apply to modify such authorization where that entity meets certain 
prerequisites, or ``entry criteria.'' Specifically, we propose that 
such a licensee may apply to modify its part 25 authorization only if 
it has: (1) an application on file with the Commission to lease the 
exclusive-use spectrum throughout an entire GIA, allocated for MSS 
provision of SCS, of a terrestrial licensee that holds all co-channel 
licenses, either directly or indirectly, throughout the GIA; (2) a 
current part 25 space station license or part 25 grant of market access 
for NGSO satellite operation sufficient to cover the leased GIA; and 
(3) proof of an application on file from the satellite operator's 
terrestrial partner for a part 25 blanket earth station license 
covering all of its subscribers' terrestrial devices that will be 
transmitting and receiving from the space station in conjunction with 
the provision of SCS. We seek specific comment on these criteria and 
whether other criteria would be better suited to facilitate SCS.
    11. Under our proposed framework, meeting certain entry criteria 
would allow an entity to apply to modify its existing satellite 
authorization. We propose that this modification application (using FCC 
Form 312, Main Form and Schedule S) include a comprehensive proposal 
for each space station in the applicant's SCS system, together with 
applicable certifications regarding related pending SCS applications. 
We further propose that applications that are acceptable for filing be 
placed on public notice to provide interested parties an opportunity to 
file pleadings in response to the application. We seek comment on this 
proposed approach and on whether there is specific technical or other 
information that should be requested from applicants seeking a 
modification of a space station authorization to provide SCS.
    12. We note that the bands we initially include in the proposed 
framework do not conform to the International Table. Given this non-
conformance, we propose to modify Sec.  25.112(a)(3) of our rules to 
permit the filing of applications notwithstanding the non-conformance. 
We seek comment on this approach, including the associated costs and 
benefits.
    13. We seek comment as to whether an SCS framework should permit 
the filing of applications from licensees holding authorizations for 
geostationary satellite orbit (GSO) operation. Further, we seek comment 
on what part 25 rule amendments are necessary to reflect our proposed 
eligibility limitations placed on applicants seeking authority to 
provide SCS.
    14. We propose to require the satellite operator's use of a 
terrestrial licensee's exclusive-use spectrum to be subject to a lease 
arrangement with that terrestrial licensee, coupled with the satellite 
operator's part 25 authorization. We seek comment on this proposal, 
including any associated costs and benefits. In the alternative, we 
seek comment on a similar entry criterion where the satellite operator, 
in lieu of a leasing arrangement pursuant to part 1 of the Commission's 
rules, has an operating agreement with a terrestrial licensee holding 
all necessary geographic area co-channel licenses. We also seek comment 
on other approaches for satellite operators to seek such authority 
particularly related to the timing for acquiring such rights.
    15. Further, although we limit our initial proposal to 
modifications of existing NGSO satellite authorizations, we seek 
comment in the alternative on other approaches that might permit new 
satellite entrants to participate in this framework. We seek comment on 
what changes to existing part 25 rules would be necessary to facilitate 
the receipt and processing of applications for new entrants seeking to 
provide SCS in collaboration with a terrestrial partner, consistent 
with our proposed entry criteria that preclude the filing of mutually 
exclusive applications.
    16. In addition to authorizing space station operations, we must 
also consider the appropriate method for authorizing terrestrial 
devices communicating with a space station. In this respect, the 
terrestrial devices would be operating as earth stations in a space 
radiocommunication service. We propose that a terrestrial licensee 
seeking to collaborate with a satellite operator to offer SCS must 
apply for and obtain a blanket earth station license for all of its 
subscribers' terrestrial devices that will be transmitting to space 
stations for SCS operations, and we seek comment on this approach and 
any other approaches that will be consistent with our statutory and 
international obligations. We also seek comment on how we can 
streamline earth station licensing processes and forms for SCS blanket 
earth station applications to eliminate any undue burden. We propose to 
modify our part 25 rules to

[[Page 21947]]

require a terrestrial licensee that has partnered with a satellite 
operator to seek a blanket earth station license for all of its 
subscribers' terrestrial devices that will operate with space stations, 
and are otherwise authorized under the terrestrial license. Further, we 
propose to include such terrestrial devices within our part 25 blanket 
earth station licensing regime, but seek comment on what portions of 
that regime are necessary in the context of the proposed framework in 
this proceeding.
    17. We seek comment on whether the terrestrial partner should be 
required in all cases to hold the part 25 blanket earth station 
license, or whether we should permit the space station licensee also to 
hold the earth station license associated with the terrestrial devices, 
provided other proposed entry criteria are met to give additional 
flexibility to the parties based on their business needs. We also 
propose that once the terrestrial licensee receives a part 25 blanket 
earth station license for its subscribers' terrestrial devices, it may 
avail itself of the minor modification procedures for blanket earth 
station licenses under part 25 to add additional terrestrial devices 
without prior Commission approval, and we seek comment on this 
approach. We also seek comment whether there is an alternative to the 
blanket earth station licensing approach that could more efficiently 
and effectively authorize SCS communications from terrestrial devices 
consistent with our international obligations and statutory mandates.
    18. Leasing. We seek comment on the extent to which our leasing 
rules require amendment to effectuate SCS. Our proposal to authorize 
SCS through a leasing component would involve permitting a terrestrial 
licensee to lease to an expanded group of potential lessees that 
includes satellite operators. A terrestrial licensee currently has the 
right to serve the identical geographic area on the same spectrum under 
its existing licenses, and SCS would simply involve a new method 
(through a combination of part 25 licensing and part 1 lease 
arrangement) of providing gap coverage. We therefore tentatively 
conclude that our proposal would not be a modification of any 
terrestrial licenses under section 316 of the Communications Act. We 
seek comment on this analysis.
    19. Under certain leasing arrangements, our current rules allow a 
lessor to attribute the construction activities of its lessee to the 
lessor's performance requirements. We seek comment on whether such 
attribution rules should remain available to terrestrial licensees 
where SCS is intended to supplement existing terrestrial service to 
fill coverage gaps. Also, in the proposed framework, the license term 
of the part 25 licensee is unlikely to consistently align with the 
license term (and concomitant lease term) of the underlying terrestrial 
license. Given the integral nature of the lease-based collaboration 
between satellite operator and terrestrial licensee, we ask how we 
should account for differences in the length of a part 25 space station 
authorization to transmit and receive signals and the length of the 
associated lease, which is tied to the remaining term of the underlying 
terrestrial license.
    20. We seek comment on whether to retain existing interference-
related leasing rules in the context of our proposed SCS framework, and 
on how our proposed SCS framework should address the potential for 
severability of a lease agreement. We also seek comment on whether 
subleasing is appropriate in the proposed framework, which relies on 
the direct collaboration between the lessee and the lessor.
    21. In July 2022, the Commission established the Enhanced 
Competition Incentive Program (ECIP), which among other things, 
modified the Commission's leasing rules to provide incentives for 
stakeholders to engage in qualifying transactions that make spectrum 
available in rural areas for advanced wireless services. Given that our 
proposed framework is primarily intended to facilitate SCS to existing 
consumer handsets, and ECIP was adopted with requirements tailored 
specifically towards provision of service through terrestrial base 
stations, we seek comment on whether to make SCS participants, 
necessarily engaged in leasing arrangements, eligible for ECIP 
benefits.
    22. Finally, we seek comment on whether we should modify existing 
leasing rules related to the provision of 911 service.
    23. Service Rules. Regarding existing service rule obligations for 
satellite operators and terrestrial wireless providers, the Commission 
proposes to apply certain relevant rules, and seeks comment on the 
applicability of other rules in the context of the proposed part 25 
licensing framework to authorize SCS. First, we propose that the space 
station licensee would retain its existing regulatory status when 
applying to modify its license to provide SCS. We seek comment on what 
circumstances might warrant a change in the space station licensee's 
regulatory status.
    24. Second, we seek comment on how best to facilitate access to our 
nation's emergency response system for consumers using SCS. We seek 
comment on the technical and operational challenges, costs, and public 
interest benefits of extending wireless 911 requirements to CMRS 
providers and satellite providers that offer SCS. We also seek comment 
on whether it is technically or otherwise feasible for terrestrial 
service providers to satisfy the requirements in Sec.  9.10 when 
incorporating their satellite operator collaborator's supplemental 
service, and if not, which particular requirements are not feasible and 
why. We also seek comment on whether we should revise our rules to 
require specific satellite operator compliance with certain 911 
requirements.
    25. We seek detailed information on the process by which SCS is 
activated when a consumer attempts to access 911 services during 
emergencies, including when no cellular or Wi-Fi service is available. 
We ask commenters to discuss how satellite providers would route 911 
services, including voice and text-to-911. In addition, we seek comment 
on consumer expectations for using SCS to reach 911, and any consumer 
privacy concerns with SCS. We seek comment on standards development and 
best practices needed to facilitate 911 services using SCS, including 
who should develop them and required timelines. We also seek comment on 
the feasibility, availability, and cost of provisioning consumer 
devices to support SCS for 911. We seek comment on congestion issues 
that could be associated with SCS supporting 911 calls and texts.
    26. The Commission's rules also require that providers of MSS to 
end-user customers comply with certain requirements regarding emergency 
call centers in certain circumstances and annual reporting requirements 
on call center traffic. We seek comment on how we should apply these 
current obligations in the context of an SCS offering.
    27. We also seek comment on how satellite operators participating 
in anticipated collaborations with terrestrial licensees intend to 
support Wireless Emergency Alerts (WEA) and any accompanying public 
safety benefits. Conversely, we seek comment on whether satellite 
operators that supplement terrestrial wireless providers' coverage 
areas could adversely affect WEA's reliability and availability or 
change the nature of a provider's participation in WEA from in whole to 
in part if the SCS satellite operators were to not participate in WEA. 
We seek comment on satellite operators' technical capability to 
geographically target (geo-target) WEAs

[[Page 21948]]

and limit overshoot. We also seek comment on whether the proposed SCS 
framework is compatible with the Federal Emergency Management Agency's 
Integrated Public Alert & Warning System (IPAWS).
    28. Next, we seek comment on applying our existing secondary market 
policies on spectrum attribution and aggregation to the proposed 
satellite-terrestrial leasing framework. In other words, to the extent 
that a satellite operator leases spectrum that is attributed to the 
lessor for purposes of our existing secondary market aggregation 
policies, we ask whether that spectrum should be attributed to the 
satellite operator for the same purposes. We ask whether there are any 
additional competitive or public interest concerns that we should 
consider that would weigh in favor of placing limits on collaborations. 
We ask to what extent would authorizing SCS as proposed impact current 
commercial agreements (e.g., secondary markets and/or roaming 
arrangements), particularly those involving smaller carriers, or impact 
stakeholders' prospective participation in the Commission's recently 
adopted ECIP program. We seek comment on whether and to what extent the 
proposed SCS framework, if adopted, could impact marketplace incentives 
to negotiate such future commercial agreements.
    29. Further, consistent with our proposed framework, a part 25 
space station license that is modified to add SCS would retain whatever 
license term remains under its existing license, and a new part 25 
blanket earth station license granted to provide SCS would be granted 
for a term of 15 years. A modification of an existing part 25 grant of 
market access to add SCS would not alter the effectiveness of that 
grant, but to continue operations to provide SCS in the United States, 
there would need to be a valid blanket U.S. earth station license for 
purposes of communicating with the non-U.S.-licensed space station with 
SCS market access. We seek comment on applying this approach in the SCS 
context, including its costs and benefits. Regarding renewal, we 
propose to apply current part 25 rules for modified part 25 licenses 
and for new blanket earth station licenses, and we seek comment on this 
approach.
    30. We note that for terrestrial wireless service providers, Sec.  
1.949 of the Commission's rules provides that a licensee seeking 
renewal must file a renewal application and satisfy a renewal standard. 
We seek comment on whether we should amend our part 25 rules to require 
a similar renewal showing for a satellite operator seeking to renew a 
part 25 license that was modified under our proposed SCS framework. In 
addition, we seek comment on any relevant changes to the terrestrial 
licensee renewal rules.
    31. Section 25.164 of the Commission's rules describes the 
milestones applicable to recipients of licenses for an NGSO satellite 
system. We propose to retain the satellite spectrum milestones 
applicable to current part 25 NGSO satellite operators to provide SCS. 
We seek comment on our proposal, including its costs and benefits. We 
also propose to apply the bond requirements applicable to current part 
25 NGSO satellite operators to the satellite operators seeking to 
provide SCS. We seek comment on the applicability of a performance 
requirements for the earth stations licensed under the SCS framework.
    32. We propose to retain the current part 25 rules regarding 
automatic termination of station authorizations to satellite licensees 
seeking to provide SCS jointly with a terrestrial collaborator. We also 
tentatively conclude that it is unnecessary to revise our parts 22, 24, 
and 27 rules related to permissible communications to enable the 
provision of SCS. We seek comment on this tentative conclusion.
    33. Finally, we seek comment on whether any other existing service 
rule obligations applicable to terrestrial providers offering 
commercial service in the relevant flexible-use bands need to be 
addressed in our proposed part 25 licensing framework. We propose to 
apply current part 25 obligations to an applicant seeking authorization 
modification as part of a collaboration with a terrestrial licensee, 
such as Sec.  25.114 requirements regarding applications for space 
station authorizations, including submitting a plan describing the 
design and operational strategies that will be used to mitigate orbital 
debris. We seek comment on this proposal. We also seek comment on 
whether--in jointly authorizing SCS through a satellite authorization 
modification and a lease of terrestrial exclusive-use licenses--the 
Commission should consider creating new or additional obligations in 
the public interest.
    34. Technical Issues. Under our proposed framework, a satellite 
operator would enter into a lease arrangement with a terrestrial 
licensee. Under our current secondary markets rules, a lessee would 
typically be subject to the same technical requirements as the lessor, 
as set forth in band-specific service rules (e.g., complying with out-
of-band emission limits to protect adjacent band licensees). We seek 
comment on the sufficiency of an approach that relies on a terrestrial 
licensee, in collaboration with a satellite operator to provide SCS, to 
protect its pre-existing lessees from harmful interference through 
engineering solutions specified in lease terms and conditions.
    35. We note that part 25 does not provide Power Flux Density (PFD) 
limits in terrestrially allocated bands at issue in this NPRM, and 
parts 24 and 27 base station power limits would not be appropriate to 
regulate satellite downlinks. Therefore, we seek comment on an 
appropriate in-band PFD limit that should be applied to each of the 
bands in which SCS is contemplated. We also seek comment on our belief 
that it is not necessary to amend the existing market area boundary 
limits in parts 22, 24, and 27 of the Commission's rules, respectively, 
in the context of SCS.
    36. To protect against harmful interference to adjacent band 
licensees, we propose to apply the existing Out of Band Emission (OOBE) 
limits for the relevant band of operation for satellite transmitters 
providing space-to-Earth transmissions. While Sec.  25.202 provides a 
range of OOBE limits, from relaxed narrowband emissions to stringent 
emissions for other bands, we propose to implement the current 
terrestrial service rule OOBE limits deemed necessary to protect 
adjacent operations in the relevant bands of operation. We seek comment 
on how satellite downlinks meeting existing terrestrial OOBE limits 
would affect adjacent channel operations if the satellite downlinks 
become widespread. We also seek comment on the applicability of other 
technical limits that currently apply to terrestrial operations in each 
of the subject bands proposed for SCS.
    37. The novel aspects of our proposal introduce new spectrum 
management challenges that warrant consideration, including the 
introduction of satellite downlinks and the continuing need to protect 
radio astronomy and other services that may be susceptible to signals 
emanating from the sky. We seek comment on whether existing rules 
addressing the protection of sensitive operations would be adequate in 
the context of the provision of SCS, and whether we should consider 
updated approaches to maintaining the unique characteristics of the 
areas covered by Sec.  1.924 of our rules. We seek comment on all 
aspects of this issue so that we might facilitate SCS while preventing 
harmful interference to sensitive passive services, such as radio 
astronomy and Earth exploration.
    38. We propose to maintain the current power limits applicable in 
each

[[Page 21949]]

band to a range of terrestrial devices that would also be licensed as 
earth stations under SCS operation. We therefore propose to amend Sec.  
25.204 (power limits for earth stations) to reflect that SCS earth 
stations would be required to meet the power limits applicable to 
terrestrial transceivers for the bands in which they seek to operate. 
We seek comment on this proposal, in particular how such existing power 
limits would work, in practice, for the proposed SCS, given that 
consumer devices often do not operate at maximum power limits currently 
permitted because of other limiting factors, such as battery life.
    39. Our terrestrial (parts 22, 24, and 27) and satellite (part 25) 
service rules require all transmitting devices to meet the relevant 
technical rules and receive equipment authorization. Accordingly, for 
new devices certified after the effective date of any rules adopted in 
this proceeding, we propose to require that the equipment certification 
applicant specifically seek certification under part 25 as well as the 
relevant terrestrial rule part(s) for all intended uses of the device. 
We seek comment on this proposal and any alternatives, including the 
costs and benefits. Also, we propose to treat as authorized-by-rule 
under part 25 existing terrestrial devices designed for use in the 
relevant flexible-use bands that are intended for SCS use, and we 
propose not to require a separate equipment authorization for such 
existing devices under part 2. However, if the Commission adopts rules 
for terrestrial devices that differ from existing rules that permit 
terrestrial operation (e.g., additional power for SCS), devices 
modified to operate under any new rules where the new rules would 
permit emissions to exceed current technical limits would be required 
to be recertified under the relevant rule part(s). We also propose to 
direct OET to use its delegated authority to administer the Equipment 
Authorization program to take all appropriate actions to implement our 
decisions.
    40. We are aware that the 3GPP standards group is exploring similar 
applications of satellite service to handsets, which it refers to as 
NTN for broadband and narrowband Internet of Things (NB-IoT) 
applications. We seek comment and stakeholder input on the status of 
any work being done by 3GPP to address interference and other concerns 
associated with satellite-based operations in flexible-use spectrum 
currently designated for terrestrial networks, and whether any such 
work should be incorporated by the Commission through this proceeding. 
We seek comment on other efforts, both domestically and 
internationally, to establish standards or conduct related work 
regarding satellite service to handsets.

C. International Coordination

    41. We propose to apply to SCS operations all existing signal level 
limits and coordination requirements that apply to the subject 
terrestrial bands. Any limit we ultimately adopt will be subject to 
current and future agreements reached with border countries. Further, 
as many of the terrestrial bands proposed for SCS are not allocated for 
mobile-satellite service use internationally, any such use would be 
considered a non-conforming use under the International 
Telecommunication Union (ITU) Radio Regulations. Further, use of the 
bands identified in this NPRM in the United States or its territories 
near international borders are subject to international agreements, 
with various rules and restrictions depending on the spectrum band and 
type of operation.
    42. We also recognize that interference metrics are different 
between satellites and terrestrial stations and that any interference 
analysis must be band-specific. Therefore, we seek comment on 
appropriate procedures for these analyses, as well as the relevant 
factors to include for specific bands. In implementing our proposal, we 
also seek comment on the viability of coordination between domestic 
satellite operators and terrestrial operators in bordering countries.
    43. Finally, we note that certain bands under consideration in this 
NPRM involve licenses that cover Alaska (including the Aleutian 
islands), Puerto Rico, Florida and the USVI, respectively. Depending on 
the scope of deployment and the bands ultimately permitted to provide 
SCS, satellite operations could impact co-channel or adjacent band 
operations, if any, in Russia, Cuba, and the British Virgin Islands. We 
seek comment on the appropriate protections in instances where 
countries do not have a common land border, but are adjacent over 
nominal water distances.

D. Extension of Supplemental Satellite Framework to Additional 
Scenarios

    44. We seek comment on the potential for expanding our proposal to 
permit these innovative new operations in bands and in locations that 
do not meet the proposed entry criteria. Commenters are encouraged to 
address technical and legal concerns with each deviation from our 
proposal, and to offer suggestions on ways we can modify our proposed 
framework in a given scenario to enable increased provision of SCS.
    45. Spectrum Bands With Non-Flexible-Use Incumbent Licensees. We 
seek comment on whether it is possible to enable SCS in any bands that 
host non-flexible-use legacy incumbent operations other than those of 
the wireless licensee(s) seeking to offer SCS. We recognize that each 
such band will require individual analysis of the technical 
characteristics of the spectrum to be deployed, as well as the nature 
and location of the relevant incumbent operations, but we seek comment 
on whether there are common features among different bands that would 
allow us to enable SCS with similar rules.
    46. Geographically Independent Areas Where Collaborating 
Terrestrial Licensees Hold All Co-Channel Licenses and Seek to Provide 
SCS. We seek comment on whether we should extend our proposal to 
include scenarios in which there are multiple unaffiliated flexible-use 
licensees in a given GIA, but all licensees in that area agree to 
jointly provide supplemental coverage from space to their customers in 
cooperation with a satellite provider. We seek comment on the 
likelihood, in this scenario, of stakeholders reaching agreements where 
all relevant terrestrial network operators would be coordinating to 
enable this innovative new capability without causing harmful 
interference. We seek comment on how to address issues where parties to 
a consortium withdraw from the collective agreement, resulting in non-
participating co-channel licensees requiring protection in the 
geographic area.
    47. We also seek comment on the unique circumstances regarding the 
2.5 GHz band. Although some licenses from Auction 108 have been issued 
for the 2.5 GHz band, the results indicate that T-Mobile may ultimately 
hold most licenses for a given co-channel block in some GIAs. We note, 
however, that the band also hosts a large number of Educational 
Broadband Service licensees, many of which lease their spectrum rights 
to T-Mobile. Further, the Commission enabled Tribal Nations to obtain 
access to the band through a priority window prior to commencement of 
the 2.5 GHz auction. Accordingly, the auction results may not fully 
indicate the nature of T-Mobile's holdings in the band. Given these 
complexities, we did not include the 2.5 GHz band in our proposal, but 
we seek comment on whether SCS would be viable in the 2.5 GHz band.
    48. Adjacent Geographic Areas Containing Non-Collaborating 
Licensees. We seek comment on

[[Page 21950]]

scenarios where the geographic area subject to potential SCS contains 
non-partner, co-channel licensees in adjacent markets located within a 
GIA. For example, a terrestrial wireless licensee that does not hold 
all co-channel licenses within a GIA, for example, CONUS, may 
nonetheless seek to collaborate with a satellite licensee to offer 
supplemental coverage to some portion of CONUS. Such scenarios can 
present complex legal and technical challenges, and we seek comment on 
how these challenges, particularly the potential for harmful 
interference to adjacent market, co-channel licensees that are in no 
way collaborating with the joint providers of supplemental satellite 
coverage, can be overcome. We also seek comment on whether the 
provision of such supplemental coverage is technically and/or 
financially viable without 100 percent CONUS coverage.
    49. Of particular technical concern in these scenarios is the 
difficulty with which satellite-based transmissions can abide by our 
field strength limits at license area boundaries. Further, depending on 
the angle of transmission between the satellite and the ground, the 
limit on emissions may in fact be exceeded above ground level, even if 
it not exceeded at ground level. We also note that where the area for 
which supplemental coverage is sought contains non-partner co-channel 
licensees, our current rules would require that the signal transmitted 
by the satellite satisfy the service-specific field strength limit or 
power flux density at the boundary of the co-channel licensee's 
adjacent license area. Our rules, however, specifically provide for 
adjacent market co-channel licensees to reach agreement to establish an 
alternative limit. We seek comment on whether this is a feasible option 
to overcome technical challenges presented in the context of newly 
introduced satellite-based transmissions where non-collaborating 
licensees are present.
    50. Finally, in the event that we were to expand the scope of the 
SCS framework, we seek comment on how to assign responsibility for 
mitigating harmful interference between non-partner, co-channel 
terrestrial licensees and SCS operators in adjacent markets located 
within a GIA.

E. Space-Based Coverage to Consumer Devices in Spectrum Already 
Allocated for Mobile Satellite Service Communications

    51. The framework for SCS proposed in this NPRM would allow 
transmissions between satellites and terrestrial devices on spectrum 
licensed for terrestrial flexible-use wireless networks. However, there 
are other models for providing service to consumer devices via 
satellite. From a regulatory perspective, we believe that such 
proposals are distinguishable from the SCS framework discussed in this 
NPRM and may not raise the same novel legal and technical complexities 
as providing supplemental coverage from space using terrestrial 
spectrum. However, from a consumer perspective, these two scenarios 
appear identical; in each case a consumer device is able to receive 
service via satellite in areas where the terrestrial network does not 
provide coverage. Accordingly, we seek comment on whether there are any 
particular considerations or actions needed related to providing 
supplemental satellite coverage to terrestrial devices besides the SCS 
framework proposed in this NPRM. We seek specific comment on how we can 
promote access to emergency 911 services and the availability of WEA in 
models that use currently allocated satellite spectrum and are 
therefore outside of the proposed SCS framework.

F. Other Issues

    52. Digital Equity and Inclusion. Finally, the Commission, as part 
of its continuing effort to advance digital equity for all, including 
people of color, persons with disabilities, persons who live in rural 
or Tribal areas, and others who are or have been historically 
underserved, marginalized, or adversely affected by persistent poverty 
or inequality, invites comment on any equity-related considerations and 
any potential benefits that may be associated with the various 
approaches and issues discussed herein. Specifically, we seek comment 
on how the various approaches that the Commission may consider may 
promote or inhibit advances in diversity, equity, inclusion, and 
accessibility, as well the scope of the Commission's relevant legal 
authority.

Procedural Matters

A. Paperwork Reduction Act

    53. This NPRM 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, they 
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 comment on how it might ``further reduce 
the information collection burden for small business concerns with 
fewer than 25 employees.''

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    54. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA), 
requires that an agency prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis for 
notice and comment rulemakings, unless the agency certifies that ``the 
rule will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.'' Accordingly, the Commission has 
prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) concerning 
potential rule and policy changes contained in the Ninth Further Notice 
of Proposed Rulemaking. The IRFA is contained in Appendix B of the 
NPRM.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    55. 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 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 NPRM.

A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules

    56. In the NPRM, the Commission proposes a new regulatory framework 
for Supplemental Coverage from Space (SCS) in which satellite operators 
collaborating with terrestrial mobile service providers would be able 
to obtain Commission authorization to operate space stations on 
currently licensed, flexible-use spectrum allocated to terrestrial 
services, thus expanding coverage to the terrestrial licensee's 
subscribers, especially in remote, unserved, and underserved areas. 
This framework could enable innovation and investment in nascent 
satellite and terrestrial interoperable technologies and cross-industry 
stakeholder partnerships to flourish in the United States. The goals of 
the proposed framework include facilitating ubiquitous wireless 
coverage across the nation; expanding the availability of emergency 
communications to consumers and the geographic range of

[[Page 21951]]

first responders to provide emergency services; and promoting 
competition in the provision of wireless services to consumers. The 
proposal also enables more intensive spectrum use and would be 
consistent with the Commission's goal to allocate increasingly scarce 
spectrum resources in the most efficient and effective manner possible. 
The Commission anticipates that the proposed SCS approach will 
incentivize creative partnerships between terrestrial network and space 
station operators and will provide additional tools to close wireless 
coverage gaps while at the same time retaining high service quality 
among 4G and 5G terrestrial networks, protect spectrum usage rights, 
and avoid harmful interference.
    57. The Commission's rules require the use of frequencies and 
frequency bands to be in accordance with the United States Table of 
Frequency Allocations (U.S. Table). To permit SCS to the subscribers of 
the relevant terrestrial networks using certain terrestrial bands, the 
Commission proposes to modify the U.S. Table to authorize mobile-
satellite service (space-to-Earth and Earth-to-space) operations in 
certain terrestrial bands that have no primary, federal or non-federal 
satellite allocations. The Commission proposes to add a non-federal 
footnote to the U.S. Table authorizing mobile-satellite service 
operations on a co-primary basis with existing allocations in a number 
of terrestrial flexible-use bands. Specifically, given the complexity 
of the proposed approach (particularly in terms of technical 
considerations), the Commission limits its initial proposal to spectrum 
and locations where (1) there is only a single terrestrial entity that 
holds, either directly or indirectly, all co-channel licenses for the 
relevant frequencies in a given geographically independent area (GIA); 
and (2) there are no primary, non-flexible use legacy incumbent 
operations (whether federal or non-federal) in the band. The flexible-
use terrestrial bands for which the Commission proposes at this time to 
add a non-federal mobile-satellite service footnote allocation are: 600 
MHz: 614-652 MHz and 663-698 MHz; 700 MHz: 698-758 MHz, 775 MHz-788 
MHz, and 805-806 MHz; 800 MHz: 824-849 MHz and 869-894 MHz; Broadband 
PCS: 1850-1915 MHz and 1930-1995 MHz; AWS-H Block: 1915-1920 MHz and 
1995-2000 MHz; and WCS: 2305-2320 MHz and 2345-2360 MHz.
    58. The NPRM discusses features of each band in detail, including 
the status of incumbents and relevant service rules that may impact the 
band's potential use under the proposed framework. The allocation is 
limited to transmissions between a space station and an end user device 
(e.g., smartphone or IoT device) of a subscriber of a terrestrial 
service that is designed to be used in the relevant terrestrial 
flexible-use band.
    59. The Commission strives to realize the public interest benefits 
of SCS as rapidly as possible, while minimizing the risk of harmful 
interference. To avoid technical complexities that could arise where 
SCS is introduced in areas where multiple co-channel licensees are 
present on a particular spectrum block, the Commission proposes to 
initially authorize SCS only in cases where a single terrestrial 
licensee holds all co-channel licenses on the relevant band in one of 
the following GIAs: (1) the contiguous United States (CONUS); (2) 
Alaska; (3) Hawaii; (4) American Samoa; (5) Puerto Rico/U.S. Virgin 
Islands; and (6) Guam/Northern Mariana Islands. In addition, the 
Commission proposes initially to limit the SCS framework to non-
geostationary satellite orbit (NGSO) satellite operators with an 
existing part 25 license or an existing part 25 grant of market access 
(for non-U.S. licensed satellite operators) (together, 
``authorization''), because such operators are best positioned for 
rapid implementation of supplemental coverage from space. To apply for 
authorization to provide SCS, a satellite operator with an existing 
part 25 authorization for NGSO operation must be able to certify that 
it has: (1) an application on file with the Commission to lease the 
exclusive-use spectrum, allocated for mobile-satellite service (MSS) 
provision of SCS, of a terrestrial licensee that holds all co-channel 
licenses throughout a GIA; (2) a current part 25 space station license 
or part 25 grant of market access for NGSO satellite operation 
sufficient to cover the GIA specified in the lease; and (3) proof of an 
application on file from the satellite operator's terrestrial partner 
for a part 25 blanket earth station license covering all of its 
subscribers' terrestrial devices that will be transmitting and 
receiving from the space station in conjunction with the provision of 
SCS. In addition to the proposed approach to authorizing space station 
operations, the NPRM proposes to authorize earth station operations by 
modifying the Commission's part 25 rules to require a terrestrial 
licensee that has partnered with a satellite operator to seek a blanket 
earth station license for all of its subscribers' terrestrial devices 
that will operate with space stations, and are otherwise authorized 
under the terrestrial license.
    60. In the NPRM, the Commission proposes a novel framework to 
facilitate SCS, a service offering that leverages currently licensed 
terrestrial, flexible-use spectrum. The Commission addresses existing 
service rule obligations for satellite operators and terrestrial 
wireless providers, by proposing to apply certain relevant rules, or 
seeking comment on the applicability of other rules in the context of 
the proposed part 25 licensing framework to authorize SCS. 
Additionally, the Commission notes that SCS operators would be required 
to protect adjacent band operations to the same extent required today 
under current rules for terrestrial use, and seeks to facilitate SCS 
through operations that are fully capable of complying with current 
technical rules and restrictions intended to prevent harmful 
interference. The Commission does not seek to modify the current, long-
standing and carefully considered protection requirements, but instead 
seeks comment on this approach in the NPRM, and on whether there are 
alternatives to ensure that any SCS offerings in these previously 
terrestrial-only allocated bands preserve the spectrum landscape to 
prevent harmful interference.

B. Legal Basis

    61. The proposed action is authorized pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 
157, 301, 303, 307, 308, 309, and 310 of the Communications Act of 
1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 301, 303, 307, 308, 309, and 
310.

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

    62. 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 that: (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.
    63. Small Businesses, Small Organizations, Small Governmental 
Jurisdictions. Our actions, over time, may affect small entities that 
are not easily categorized at present. We therefore describe here, at 
the outset, three broad groups of small entities that could be directly 
affected herein. First,

[[Page 21952]]

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 32.5 million businesses.
    64. 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 2020, there were 
approximately 447,689 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.
    65. 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 90,075 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, we estimate that at 
least 48,971 entities fall into the category of ``small governmental 
jurisdictions.''
    66. Satellite Telecommunications. This industry 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 SBA small business size standard for this 
industry classifies a business with $38.5 million or less in annual 
receipts as small. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that 275 firms 
in this industry operated for the entire year. Of this number, 242 
firms had revenue of less than $25 million. Additionally, based on 
Commission data in the 2021 Universal Service Monitoring Report, as of 
December 31, 2020, there were 71 providers that reported they were 
engaged in the provision of satellite telecommunications services. Of 
these providers, the Commission estimates that approximately 48 
providers have 1,500 or fewer employees. Consequently, using the SBA's 
small business size standard, a little more than half of these 
providers can be considered small entities.
    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 
SBA size standard for this industry classifies a business as small if 
it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show 
that there were 2,893 firms in this industry that operated for the 
entire year. Of that number, 2,837 firms employed fewer than 250 
employees. Additionally, based on Commission data in the 2021 Universal 
Service Monitoring Report, as of December 31, 2020, there were 797 
providers that reported they were engaged in the provision of wireless 
services. Of these providers, the Commission estimates that 715 
providers have 1,500 or fewer employees. Consequently, using the SBA's 
small business size standard, most of these providers can be considered 
small entities.
    68. All Other Telecommunications. This industry 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. Providers of 
internet services (e.g., dial-up ISPs) or voice over internet protocol 
(VoIP) services, via client-supplied telecommunications connections are 
also included in this industry. The SBA small business size standard 
for this industry classifies firms with annual receipts of $35 million 
or less as small. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that there were 
1,079 firms in this industry that operated for the entire year. Of 
those firms, 1,039 had revenue of less than $25 million. Based on this 
data, the Commission estimates that the majority of ``All Other 
Telecommunications'' firms can be considered small.

D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other 
Compliance Requirements for Small Entities

    69. To effectuate SCS in certain flexible-use bands previously 
allocated solely for terrestrial use, the Commission proposes to 
authorize satellite-to-terrestrial (uplink and downlink) operations in 
these bands by allowing an NGSO satellite operator with an existing 
part 25 authorization to apply to modify such authorization where that 
entity meets certain prerequisites, or ``entry criteria.'' The proposed 
framework and requirements upon which the Commission seeks comment, if 
adopted, may impose new and/or additional reporting, recordkeeping and 
other compliance requirements on small entities as well as other 
licensees to allow those licensees seeking to provide SCS.
    70. Specifically, the Commission proposes that a satellite operator 
authorized for NGSO satellite operation may apply to modify its part 25 
authorization only if the satellite operator has: (1) an application on 
file with the Commission to lease the exclusive-use spectrum, allocated 
for MSS provision of SCS, of a terrestrial licensee that holds all co-
channel licenses, directly or indirectly, throughout a GIA; (2) a 
current part 25 space station license or part 25 grant of market access 
for NGSO satellite operation sufficient to cover the leased GIA; and 
(3) proof of an application on file from the satellite operator's 
terrestrial partner for a part 25 blanket earth station license 
covering all of its subscribers' terrestrial devices that will be 
transmitting and receiving from the space station in conjunction with 
the provision of SCS.
    71. Under the proposed framework, meeting the entry criteria would 
allow an entity to apply to modify its existing satellite 
authorization. However, all related applications including those 
seeking modification, lease applications, and blanket earth station 
applications--must first be granted to provide supplemental coverage 
from space. Thus, the requirements proposed in the NPRM are in addition 
to the existing underlying reporting, recordkeeping, and compliance 
requirements. The

[[Page 21953]]

Commission seeks comment on our proposed approach, including the costs, 
benefits, and burdens associated with alternative methods of 
authorizing SCS, and any incremental burdens associated with adding 
SCS, such as additional recordkeeping that may be required.
    72. At this time, the Commission is not in a position to determine 
whether 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. The Commission invites comment on the costs and burdens 
of the proposals in the NPRM and expects the information received in 
comments including, where requested, cost and benefit analyses, to help 
the Commission identify and evaluate relevant compliance matters for 
small entities, including compliance costs and other burdens that may 
result if the proposals and associated requirements discussed in the 
NPRM are adopted.

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

    73. 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.''
    74. The Commission has a longstanding commitment to ensuring that 
the country's scarce and valuable spectrum resource is put to its 
highest and best use. Consistent with this commitment, in the NPRM, the 
Commission has proposed a novel framework for SCS that would allow, 
through a collaboration between a terrestrial mobile service provider 
and satellite operator, transmissions directly from satellites to 
terrestrial devices on spectrum that is currently allocated and 
licensed exclusively on a terrestrial basis. In the discussion of the 
proposals and matters upon which the Commission seeks comment, the NPRM 
raises alternatives and seeks input such as costs and benefits analyses 
from small and other entities. By requesting such information, the 
Commission has given small entities the opportunity to broaden the 
scope of the Commission's understanding of impacts which may not be 
readily apparent, and offer alternatives not already considered that 
could minimize the economic impact on small entities.
    75. Although the Commission limits its initial SCS framework 
proposal to NGSO operators with an existing part 25 license or an 
existing part 25 grant of market access (for non-U.S. licensed 
satellite operators) because these operators are in the best position 
to rapidly implement supplemental coverage from space, the Commission 
considered that there may be other alternatives, and in the NPRM seeks 
comment on other approaches that might permit new entrants to 
participate in this framework. Current part 25 authorization for NGSO 
systems typically involves a processing round procedure whereby 
applicants for licenses or petitioners for U.S. market access are 
considered in groups based on frequencies requested and filing date. 
The issuance of a modified part 25 satellite authorization, coupled 
with a leasing requirement included in the proposed entry criteria, 
would appropriately encompass the necessary arrangement for the 
provision of supplemental coverage from space. Thus, the initial 
proposal would not allow a satellite operator to be granted an 
independent part 25 co-channel authorization to use terrestrial 
spectrum in a GIA without an arrangement with the terrestrial license 
holder.
    76. In the NPRM, the Commission considered and asked whether a 
satellite operator with an existing part 25 space authorization should 
be permitted to apply for a conditional license to modify its 
authorization (in order to provide terrestrial coverage) without first 
having identified a terrestrial license partner. The Commission further 
considered and asked whether such an approach would provide additional 
flexibility to facilitate the participation of small businesses. Using 
a measured approach will allow the Commission to fully develop a robust 
record to consider policies and rules that may ultimately permit 
expansion to new or other types of satellite entrants collaborating 
with terrestrial licensees such as small entities authorized on 
additional spectrum blocks that do not meet the proposed SCS framework.
    77. As part of the SCS framework, the Commission proposes that a 
terrestrial licensee seeking to collaborate with a satellite operator 
to offer SCS must apply for and obtain a blanket earth station license 
for all of its subscribers' terrestrial devices that will be 
transmitting to space stations for SCS operations, and we seek comment 
on this approach and any other approaches that will be consistent with 
our statutory and international obligations. The Commission also seeks 
comment on how we can streamline earth station licensing processes and 
forms for SCS blanket earth station applications to eliminate any undue 
burden. For example, the NPRM asks to what extent approval of devices 
in the equipment certification process would render information 
ordinarily required in a blanket earth station application unnecessary. 
To streamline the licensing process, the NPRM seek comment on what 
information currently collected in Schedule B might be eliminated and 
perhaps be replaced by a certification(s). If a certification approach 
is adopted, the NPRM seeks comment on what certifications would be 
necessary. For example, instead of listing the devices that would be 
covered, the NPRM asks whether it would be sufficient to require a 
certification stating that: (1) the earth station applicant meets all 
SCS requirements; (2) the blanket earth station license will cover all 
of the current and future subscribers' devices activated in the 
relevant terrestrial network; and (3) the devices covered by the 
blanket earth station license have already received equipment 
authorizations under Commission rules.
    78. The NPRM also seeks comment on eligibility for the Enhanced 
Competition Incentive Program (ECIP), which the Commission established 
in July 2022 to facilitate new opportunities for small carriers and 
tribal nations to increase access to spectrum, while incorporating 
provisions to ensure against program waste, fraud, and abuse. Given 
that the proposed framework is primarily intended to facilitate 
provision of SCS to existing consumer handsets, and ECIP was adopted 
with requirements tailored specifically towards provision of service 
through terrestrial base stations, the Commission seeks comment on 
whether to make SCS participants, necessarily engaged in leasing 
arrangements, eligible for ECIP benefits which could reduce the 
economic impacts for small carriers and tribal nations.
    79. The ECIP rules were designed to facilitate broader access to 
wireless spectrum under two prongs: one focused on transactions with 
small carriers or tribal nations and one focused on transactions 
resulting in

[[Page 21954]]

construction in rural areas. The program benefits include lengthened 
license terms and extended timeframes to meet program requirements, but 
the program also incorporates recordkeeping elements designed to 
prevent waste, fraud, and abuse. The Commission considered and the NPRM 
seeks comment on how to integrate these safeguards and the ECIP 
program's goals with the expansion of SCS. Specifically, the NPRM 
requests comment on how to apply ECIP rules requiring specific lessee 
action under the rural transactions-focused prong, as stated above, to 
a part 25 satellite-licensed lessee, with particular focus on the 
requirement that a lessee provide service for the entire Qualifying 
Geography for three continuous years and that service must commence no 
later than two years after entering the lease. The Commission also 
considered and seeks comment on how to address any potential conflict 
between these ECIP obligations and part 25 milestones applicable to a 
satellite licensee, and asks whether parties can meet ECIP requirements 
in an SCS context, or whether the tailored conditions of ECIP 
participation would reduce the flexibility of potential terrestrial-
satellite collaborators and thus operate as a disincentive for SCS 
providers to participate in the ECIP program regardless of whether it 
is permitted.
    80. Further, the Commission asks whether there are any additional 
competitive or public interest concerns that we should consider that 
would weigh in favor of placing limits on the proposed collaboration. 
The NPRM seeks comment on the extent to which authorizing SCS as 
proposed would impact current commercial agreements (e.g., secondary 
markets and/or roaming arrangements), particularly those involving 
smaller carriers, or impact stakeholders' prospective participation in 
the Commission's recently adopted ECIP program. The NPRM also seeks 
comment on whether and to what extent the proposed SCS framework, if 
adopted, could impact marketplace incentives to negotiate such future 
commercial agreements.
    81. Allowing smaller entities to collaborate to provide SCS service 
could facilitate increased small business participation. The Commission 
considered extending the provision of SCS to geographically independent 
areas where collaborating terrestrial licensees hold all co-channel 
licenses and seek to provide SCS and seeks comment on this alternative 
in the NPRM. Specifically, the Commission asks whether it should extend 
its proposal to include scenarios in which there are multiple 
unaffiliated flexible-use licensees in a given GIA, but all licensees 
in that area agree to jointly provide a supplemental coverage from 
space to their customers in cooperation with a satellite provider. The 
NPRM also seeks comment on the likelihood, in this scenario, of 
stakeholders reaching agreements where all relevant terrestrial network 
operators would be coordinating to enable this innovative new 
capability without causing harmful interference, the market 
arrangements that might be required, and the types of changes to the 
proposed SCS framework that such a change would entail.
    82. In addition, the Commission considered scenarios where the 
geographic area subject to potential SCS contains non-partner, co-
channel licensees in adjacent markets located within a GIA, which could 
impact small businesses. For example, a terrestrial wireless licensee 
that does not hold all co-channel licenses in a given GIA, for example 
CONUS, may nonetheless seek to partner with a satellite licensee to 
offer supplemental coverage in a part of CONUS. Such scenarios can 
present complex legal and technical challenges and the NPRM therefore 
seeks comment on how these challenges, particularly the potential for 
harmful interference to adjacent market, co-channel licensees that are 
not seeking to collaborate with the joint providers of supplemental 
satellite coverage, and that could include small businesses, can be 
overcome. Consequently, the NPRM seeks comment on the technical and/or 
financial viability of SCS expansion in scenarios without 100 percent 
CONUS coverage. Further, the NPRM seeks comment on whether it is 
possible to enable SCS in bands that have non-flexible use legacy 
incumbent operations entitled to protection under our rules, which 
could consist of small business incumbent licensees. The Commission 
recognizes that each such band will require individual analysis of the 
technical characteristics of the spectrum to be deployed, as well as 
the nature and location of the relevant incumbent operations. The 
Commission therefore considered and seeks comment on whether there are 
common features among different bands that would allow provision of SCS 
with similar rules. For example, the NPRM seeks comment on whether 
there are bands for which non-flexible use incumbent operations are 
sufficiently localized such that protection zones would provide 
sufficient protection and, if so, what are those zones and protection 
requirements.
    83. 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.

F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the 
Proposed Rules

    84. None.

List of Subjects

47 CFR Part 2

    Communications, Satellites, Telecommunications.

47 CFR Part 25

    Administrative practice and procedure, Satellites. Federal 
Communications Commission.

Marlene Dortch,
Secretary.

Proposed Rules

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR parts 2 and 25 as 
follows:

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

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

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

0
2. Amend Sec.  2.106 by:
0
a. Revising the paragraph (a) Allocation Table pages 30, 36, 37, and 
38.
0
b. In the list of Non-Federal Government (NG) Footnotes, adding, in 
numerical order, footnote ``NG33A.''
    The revisions and additions read as follows:


Sec.  2.106  Table of Frequency Allocations.

    (a) * * *
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P

[[Page 21955]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12AP23.033


[[Page 21956]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12AP23.034


[[Page 21957]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12AP23.035


[[Page 21958]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12AP23.036


[[Page 21959]]


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

Non-Federal Government (NG) Footnotes

* * * * *
    NG33A The bands 614-652 MHz and 663-758 MHz, 775 MHz-788 MHz, and 
805-806 MHz, 824-849 MHz and 869-894 MHz, 1850-1920 MHz and 1930-2000 
MHz, and 2305-2320 MHz and 2345-2360 MHz are allocated to the mobile-
satellite service (MSS) on a co-primary basis. MSS operations in these 
frequency bands are subject to the Commission's rules for Supplemental 
Coverage from Space set forth in part 25 of this chapter.
* * * * *

PART 25--SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS

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

    Authority:  47 U.S.C. 154, 301, 302, 303, 307, 309, 310, 319, 
332, 605, and 721, unless otherwise noted.

0
4. Amend Sec.  25.103 by adding, in alphabetical order, the definitions 
of ``Geographically independent area (GIA)'' and ``Supplemental 
Coverage from Space (SCS)'' to read as follows:


Sec.  25.103  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Geographically independent area (GIA). Any of the following six 
areas: (1) CONUS; (2) Alaska; (3) Hawaii; (4) American Samoa; (5) 
Puerto Rico/U.S. Virgin Islands; and (6) Guam/Northern Mariana Islands.
* * * * *
    Supplemental Coverage from Space (SCS). The provision of coverage 
to a terrestrial mobile service licensee's subscribers operating in 
underserved and/or unserved areas within a terrestrial mobile service 
licensee's license area, comprising a GIA, only through a collaboration 
between an existing NGSO operator and a terrestrial mobile service 
licensee involving transmissions between space stations and mobile end-
user devices. NGSO operators and terrestrial mobile service licensees 
seeking to provide SCS must be authorized in compliance with Sec.  
25.125.
* * * * *
0
5. Amend Sec.  25.109 by adding paragraph (f) to read as follows:


Sec.  25.109  Cross-reference.

* * * * *
    (f) Space and earth stations providing Supplemental Coverage from 
Space are subject to technical rules in parts 22, 24, and 27 of this 
chapter where applicable.
0
6. Amend Sec.  25.112 by revising paragraph (a)(3) to read as follows:


Sec.  25.112  Dismissal and return of applications.

    (a) * * *
    (3) The application requests authority to operate a space station 
in a frequency band that is not allocated internationally for such 
operations under the Radio Regulations of the International 
Telecommunication Union, unless the application is filed pursuant to 
Sec. Sec.  25.122, 25.123, or 25.125.
* * * * *
0
7. Amend Sec.  25.115 by adding paragraph (q) to read as follows:


Sec.  25.115  Applications for earth station authorizations.

* * * * *
    (q) A blanket license application for an earth station 
authorization to provide Supplemental Coverage from Space must comply 
with Sec.  25.125.
0
8. Amend Sec.  25.117 by adding paragraph (i) to read as follows:


Sec.  25.117  Modification of station license.

* * * * *
    (i) An application for modification of a space station 
authorization to provide Supplemental Coverage from Space must comply 
with Sec.  25.125.
0
9. Add Sec.  25.125 to read as follows:


Sec.  25.125  Applications for supplemental coverage from space (SCS).

    (a) SCS entry criteria. This section shall only apply to applicants 
seeking to provide Supplemental Coverage from Space (SCS). An applicant 
for SCS space station authorization must be a holder of either an 
existing part 25 NGSO license or grant of U.S. market access 
collaborating with a terrestrial mobile service provider that holds all 
co-channel licenses throughout a Geographically Independent Area (GIA) 
in a band allocated to Mobile-Satellite Service (MSS) operation through 
footnote NG33A in the United States Table of Frequency Allocations 
under Sec.  2.106 of this chapter. Applicants for SCS space stations 
must comply with the requirements set forth in paragraph (b) of this 
section. Applicants for SCS earth stations must comply with the 
requirements set forth in paragraph (c) of this section.
    (b) SCS space station application requirements. An applicant 
seeking a space station authorization for the provision of SCS shall 
submit an application requesting modification of a current part 25 NGSO 
license or grant of U.S. market access.
    (1) The application shall include a certification to the following:
    (i) an application is on file with the Commission to lease spectrum 
allocated for MSS provision of SCS from a terrestrial mobile service 
provider that holds, either directly or indirectly, all co-channel 
licenses throughout a GIA;
    (ii) the current part 25 space station license or part 25 grant of 
market access for NGSO satellite operation is sufficient to cover the 
leased GIA; and
    (iii) a blanket license application is on file, pursuant to 
paragraph (c) of this section, from the satellite operator's 
terrestrial licensee partner for earth stations, covering all of its 
subscribers' terrestrial devices that will be transmitting and 
receiving from the space station in conjunction with the provision of 
SCS.
    (2) The application shall include a comprehensive proposal for each 
space station in the proposed SCS system on FCC Form 312, Main Form and 
Schedule S, as described in Sec.  25.114(a) through (d), together with 
the certification described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
    (3) Applications that are acceptable for filing will be placed on 
public notice pursuant to Sec.  25.151 to provide interested parties an 
opportunity to file pleadings in response to the application pursuant 
to Sec.  25.154.
    (4) The Commission will review the application and all the 
pleadings filed in response to the application, and will grant 
applications that meet the standards of this section, Sec.  25.156(a), 
and are otherwise in accordance with applicable Commission rules.
    (5) Applications to modify a part 25 authorization to provide SCS 
will not be subject to the processing round procedures in Sec. Sec.  
25.137 and 25.157.
    (c) SCS earth station application requirements. A terrestrial 
licensee collaborating with an NGSO satellite operator to provide SCS 
shall submit an application for a blanket earth station license for all 
of its subscribers' terrestrial end-user devices that will communicate 
with the NGSO operator's space stations.
    (1) The terrestrial licensee must file for such earth station 
authorization using FCC Form 312, Main Form and Schedule B, as 
described in Sec.  25.115(a), specifying the number of units to be 
covered by the blanket license.
    (2) Applications that are acceptable for filing will be placed on 
public notice pursuant to Sec.  25.151 to provide interested parties an 
opportunity to file pleadings in response to the application pursuant 
to Sec.  25.154.
    (3) The Commission will review the application and all the 
pleadings filed in response to the application, and will grant 
applications that meet the

[[Page 21960]]

standards of this section, Sec.  25.156(a), and are otherwise in 
accordance with applicable Commission rules.
    (4) Once the terrestrial licensee receives a part 25 blanket 
license for its subscribers' terrestrial devices, it may avail itself 
of the minor modification procedures for blanket earth station licenses 
pursuant to Sec.  25.118 to add additional terrestrial devices without 
prior Commission approval.
    (d) SCS joint licensing requirement. Authorization to provide SCS 
requires grant of three applications: part 25 modification application 
or request for modification of a grant of market access; part 1 lease 
application; and part 25 blanket earth station license application.
    (e) Equipment authorization for SCS earth stations.
    (1) Each SCS earth station used for the provision of SCS under this 
section shall meet the equipment authorization requirements under Sec.  
25.129 and all equipment authorization requirements for all intended 
uses of the device as specified in parts 22, 24, and 27 of this chapter 
(e.g., Sec. Sec.  22.377, 24.51, 27.51).
    (2) Terrestrial devices with existing equipment authorizations 
under parts 22, 24, or 27 of this chapter as of [[EFFECTIVE DATE OF 
FINAL RULE]] are authorized by rule for SCS use under this section, 
consistent with their existing equipment authorizations.
0
10. Amend Sec.  25.129 by adding paragraph (e) to read as follows:


Sec.  25.129  Equipment authorization for portable earth-station 
transceivers.

* * * * *
    (e) Earth station transceivers used for the provision of SCS shall 
comply with Sec.  25.125.
0
11. Amend Sec.  25.137 by revising paragraph (f) to read as follows:


Sec.  25.137  Requests for U.S. market access through non-U.S.-licensed 
space stations.

* * * * *
    (f) A non-U.S.-licensed space station operator that has been 
granted access to the United States market pursuant to a declaratory 
ruling may modify its U.S. operations under the procedures set forth in 
Sec. Sec.  25.117(d), (h), and (i) and 25.118(e).
* * * * *
0
12. Amend Sec.  25.202 by adding paragraph (k) to read as follows:


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

* * * * *
    (k) Space station downlinks operating as SCS under the provisions 
of NG33A of the U.S. Table of Allocations and Sec.  25.125 are subject 
to the following rules.
    (1) Out of band emission limits. Space station downlink emissions 
on spectrum allocated for mobile-satellite service and used in 
providing SCS shall meet the out-of-band emission limits applicable to 
the terrestrial base stations of its terrestrial partner, as set forth 
in parts 22, 24, or 27 of this chapter (e.g., Sec. Sec.  22.917, 
24.238, 27.53), respectively.
    (2) Reserved.
0
13. Amend Sec.  25.204 by revising paragraph (g) to read as follows:


Sec.  25.204  Power limits for earth stations.

* * * * *
    (g) Earth stations operating in conjunction with the provision of 
SCS pursuant to Sec.  25.125 shall comply with the power requirements 
for the respective band of operation of the terrestrial partner for 
terrestrial transceivers in parts 22, 24, or 27 of this chapter (e.g., 
Sec. Sec.  22.913, 24.232, 27.50).
0
14. Amend Sec.  25.208 by adding paragraph (w) to read as follows:


Sec.  25.208  Power flux-density limits.

* * * * *
    (w) SCS operations in bands authorized by NG33A in the Table of 
Frequency Allocations and Sec.  25.125 must meet the relevant boundary 
signal level limits and coordination requirements for the relevant 
terrestrial band of operation, as specified by treaty and in parts 22, 
24, and 27 of this chapter (e.g., Sec. Sec.  22.169, 22.983(c), 24.236, 
27.55, 27.57), at applicable international borders. Conversion from 
field strength to PFD shall be done using accepted engineering 
techniques.

[FR Doc. 2023-07214 Filed 4-11-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P