[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 130 (Monday, July 10, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43938-43975]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-13500]
[[Page 43937]]
Vol. 88
Monday,
No. 130
July 10, 2023
Part V
Federal Communications Commission
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
47 CFR Part 1, 2 et al.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Expanding Use of the 12.7-13.25 GHz Band for Mobile Broadband or Other
Expanded Use; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 88 , No. 130 / Monday, July 10, 2023 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 43938]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Parts 1, 2, 15, 25, 27, 74, 78, and 101
[GN Docket No. 22-352; FCC 23-36; FR ID 148292]
Expanding Use of the 12.7-13.25 GHz Band for Mobile Broadband or
Other Expanded Use
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission
(Commission or FCC) seeks comment on various proposed means for
transitioning some or all of the 550 megahertz between 12.7-13.25 GHz
(the 12.7 GHz band) to mobile broadband and other expanded use, as well
as on alternative changes to the Commission's rules that could promote
use of the band on a shared basis.
DATES: Comments are due on or before August 9, 2023; reply comments are
due on or before September 8, 2023. Written comments on the Paperwork
Reduction Act proposed information collection requirements must be
submitted by the public, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and
other interested parties on or before September 8, 2023. Written
comments on the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) in this
document must have a separate and distinct heading designating them as
responses to the IRFA and must be submitted by the public on or before
August 9, 2023.
ADDRESSES: Pursuant to Sec. Sec. 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's
rules (47 CFR 1.415, 1.419), interested parties may file comments and
reply comments on or before the dates indicated on the first page of
this document. Comments may be filed using the Commission's Electronic
Comment Filing System (ECFS). See Electronic Filing of Documents in
Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (1998). You may submit comments
identified by GN Docket No. 22-352 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.
Filings can be sent by commercial overnight courier, or by
first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mall. 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 (braille, large print, computer diskettes, or audio
recordings), please send an email to [email protected] or call the
Consumer & Government Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (VOICE), (202)
418-0432 (TTY).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Madelaine Maior of the Wireless
Telecommunications Bureau (WTB), Broadband Division, at
[email protected] or 202-418-1466; Simon Banyai of the Wireless
Telecommunications Bureau, at [email protected] or (202) 418-1443;
or Nick Oros of the Office of Engineering and Technology, at
[email protected] or (202) 418-2099. For additional information
concerning the Paperwork Reduction Act proposed information
requirements contained in this document, send an email to [email protected]
or contact Kathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in GN Docket No. 22-352 included in the
Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking and Order, FCC 23-36, adopted on May 18, 2023
and released on May 19, 2023. The full text this document is available
at https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-23-36A1.pdf. The Report
and Order and the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (WT Docket No.
20-443), and the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and the Order (GN Docket
No. 22-352), i.e., the four FCC actions in FCC 23-36, are published
separately in the Rules and Regulations and the Proposed Rules
sections, as applicable, in this issue of the Federal Register.
Regulatory Flexibility Act: The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980,
as amended (RFA), requires an agency to 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.'' The Commission seeks comment on potential rule and policy
changes contained in the NPRM, and accordingly, has prepared an Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA). The IRFA for the NPRM in GN
Docket No. 22-352 is set forth below in this document, and written
public comments are requested. Comments must be filed by the deadlines
for comments on the NPRM indicated under the DATES section of this
document and must have a separate and distinct heading designating them
as responses to the IRFA. The Commission reminds commenters to file in
the appropriate docket: GN Docket No. 22-352 for the NPRM.
Paperwork Reduction Act: This document may contain proposed
modified information collection requirements. Therefore, the Commission
seeks comment on potential new or revised information collections
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. If the Commission
adopts any new or revised information collection requirements, the
Commission will publish a notice in the Federal Register inviting the
general public and the Office of Management and Budget to comment on
the information collection requirements, as required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. In addition, pursuant to the
Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44
U.S.C. 3506(c)(4)), the Commission seeks specific comments on how it
might further reduce the information collection burden for small
business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
Ex Parte Rules: This proceeding 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
[[Page 43939]]
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. In proceedings governed by Sec. 1.49(f) or for which the
Commission has made available a method of electronic filing, written ex
parte presentations and memoranda summarizing oral ex parte
presentations, and all attachments thereto, must be filed through the
electronic comment filing system available for that proceeding, and
must be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc, .xml, .ppt,
searchable .pdf). Documents shown or given to Commission staff during
ex parte meetings are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and
must be filed consistent with Sec. 1.1206(b). Participants in this
proceeding should familiarize themselves with the Commission's ex parte
rules.
Synopsis
I. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in GN Docket No. 22-352 \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Record references and citations refer to GN Docket No. 22-
352, unless otherwise noted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Background
1. 12.7-13.25 GHz Band--550 megahertz
1. In the United States, the 12.7 GHz band is allocated on a
primary basis for non-Federal use to Fixed Service (FS), Fixed
Satellite Service (Earth-to-space), and the Mobile Service (MS).\2\ The
band is shared among Fixed Microwave Services (Fixed Service or FS--
part 101), fixed and mobile Broadcast Auxiliary Services (BAS--part
74), fixed and mobile Cable Television Relay Services (CARS--part 78),
and FSS--part 25.\3\ The 12.75-13.25 GHz band has only limited Federal
use. Specifically, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(NASA) operates a receive-only earth station for its Deep Space Network
(DSN) at Goldstone, California, that is authorized to receive
transmissions across the entire 12.75-13.25 GHz band.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 47 CFR 2.106. The international and domestic allocations are
similar for the 12.75-13.25 GHz band in most respects. However,
space-to-Earth transmissions are permitted at 12.7-12.75 GHz in
International Telecommunication Union (ITU) Regions 1 and 3 but not
in Region 2. 47 CFR 2.106, International Table. Domestically,
Footnote NG52 of the U.S. Table precludes most GSO FSS systems from
using the band for domestic services and limits the deployment of
FSS earth stations in the band. Id. at n.NG52 (n.NG52 revised as 47
CFR 2.106(d)(52), at 88 FR 37318, June 7, 2023, effective July 7,
2023).
\3\ See 47 CFR part 25 (Sec. Sec. 25.101-25.702), part 74
(Sec. Sec. 74.600-74.690), part 78 (Sec. Sec. 78.1-78.115), part
101 (Sec. Sec. 101.1-101.1527).
\4\ See 47 CFR 2.106 & n.US251 (n.US251 revised as 47 CFR
2.106(c)(251), at 88 FR 37318, June 7, 2023, effective July 7,
2023). See also infra note 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. On October 28, 2022, the Commission released its 12.7 GHz Notice
of Inquiry (12.7 NOI) to broadly seek information on the current use of
the 12.7 GHz band, how the Commission could encourage more efficient
and intensive use of the band, and whether the band is suitable for
mobile broadband or other expanded use.\5\ In response to the 12.7 NOI,
very few parties have argued that the current balance of incumbents in
the 12.7 GHz band should be left unchanged and that the band should
remain untouched, and a significant number argue that the band should
be used for exclusive, fixed or mobile, flexible high-powered use.
Accordingly, in the NPRM, the Commission seeks comment on various
proposed means for transitioning some or all of the 12.7 GHz band to
mobile broadband and other expanded use. The Commission also seeks
comment on changes to the Commission's rules that could promote
expanded use of the band on a shared basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See In the Matter of Expanding Use of the 12.7-13.25 GHz
Band for Mobile Broadband or Other Expanded Use, GN Docket No. 22-
352, Notice of Inquiry, FCC 22-80, 2022 WL 16634851, at *1, para. 2
(Oct. 28, 2022) (12.7 NOI). In the Order portion of the 12.7 NOI,
the Commission extended a temporary freeze on 12.7 GHz band
applications pending the outcome of GN Docket No. 22-352. Id. at
*14, para. 44. When applicable, the Commission refers to the Order
portion of the 12.7 NOI as the 12.7 Freeze Extension Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Expanded Use of the 12.7-13.25 GHz Band
1. Repurposing for Mobile Broadband or Other Expanded Use
3. In the United States, the 12.7 GHz band is allocated on a
primary basis for non-Federal use to FS, FSS (Earth-to-space), and the
MS.\6\ The band is shared among Fixed Microwave Services (FS--part
101), Broadcast Auxiliary Services (fixed and mobile BAS--part 74),
fixed and mobile Cable Television Relay Services (CARS--part 78), and
Fixed Satellite Services (FSS--part 25).\7\ Based on the Commission's
licensing records, these services in the 12.7 GHz band include
approximately 1,846 terrestrial service call signs that authorize a
total of approximately 2,070 fixed point-to-point paths, and
approximately 400 licenses that authorize mobile TV pickup
operations.\8\ There are also 27 call signs for FSS space stations and
43 call signs for FSS earth stations.\9\ Terrestrial and space services
in the 12.7 GHz band are subject to prior-coordination requirements to
avoid interference.\10\ The 12.7 GHz band has only limited Federal use.
Specifically, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
operates a receive-only earth station for its Deep Space Network (DSN)
at Goldstone, California, that is authorized to receive transmissions
across the entire 12.7 GHz band.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 47 CFR 2.106. The international and domestic allocations are
similar for the 12.75-13.25 GHz band in most respects. However,
space-to-Earth transmissions are permitted at 12.7-12.75 GHz in ITU
Regions 1 and 3 but not in Region 2. 47 CFR 2.106, International
Table. Domestically, Footnote NG52 of the U.S. Table precludes most
GSO FSS systems from using the band for domestic services and limits
the deployment of FSS earth stations in the band. Id. at n.NG52
(n.NG52 revised as 47 CFR 2.106(d)(52), at 88 FR 37318, June 7,
2023, effective July 7, 2023).
\7\ See 47 CFR part 25 (Sec. Sec. 25.101-25.702), part 74
(Sec. Sec. 74.600-74.690), part 78 (Sec. Sec. 78.1-78.115), part
101 (Sec. Sec. 101.1-101.1527).
\8\ Licensing data for fixed and mobile BAS under part 74 and
Fixed Microwave under part 101 is in the Universal Licensing System
(ULS). Licensing data for fixed and mobile CARS is in the Cable
Operations and Licensing System (COALS). These statistics are based
on a review of ULS on April 26, 2023. There are also approximately
65 fixed or mobile CARS call signs in COALS.
\9\ FSS data are in the International Bureau Electronic Filing
System (MyIBFS). These statistics are based on a review of MyIBFS on
April 26, 2023.
\10\ See 47 CFR 25.115(a)(6)(i), 101.21(f). The administrative
aspects of the coordination process are set forth in 47 CFR 101.103
for coordinating terrestrial stations with earth stations, and in 47
CFR 25.203 for coordinating earth stations with terrestrial
stations. See also id. Sec. 25.251(a). The coordination procedures
specified in 47 CFR 101.103 and 25.203 are applicable for
coordinating between earth stations and fixed microwave links, and
the information provided during coordination is set forth in 47 CFR
25.203(c)(2) and 101.103(d)(2)(ii).
\11\ See 47 CFR 2.106 & n.US251 (``The band 12.75-13.25 GHz is
also allocated to the space research (deep space) (space-to-Earth)
service for reception only at Goldstone, CA (35[deg]20' N,
116[deg]53' W).'') (n.US251 revised as 47 CFR 2.106(c)(251), at 88
FR 37318, June 7, 2023, effective July 7, 2023). For additional
details concerning the domestic and international allocations, see
12.7 NOI at *2-*3, paras. 4-6. For additional details on current
uses, see 12.7 NOI at *2-*5, paras. 4-11 (II.B. Current uses of the
12.7-13.25 GHz (12.7 GHz) Band).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Given the existing incumbent uses of the band, the 12.7 NOI
sought comment on two potential options for making some or all of the
band available for mobile broadband and other expanded uses: (1)
repurposing some or all of the band for such use with sunset
[[Page 43940]]
of some or all incumbent services and relocation and cost-sharing
requirements for new services,\12\ and (2) potential sharing methods
among new and incumbent services.\13\ In connection with these
potential options, the 12.7 NOI asked about potential licensing
approaches to facilitate deployment of new mobile broadband or other
expanded use of the band.\14\ The 12.7 NOI also sought comment on an
appropriate protection level that new operations in the 12.7 GHz band
would have to provide incumbent services in the lower and upper
adjacent bands.\15\ The 12.7 NOI also sought comment on the costs and
benefits that should be considered in deciding whether to promote new
service opportunities in the band through repurposing/relocation or
sharing as well as whether the Commission should consider some
combination of these methods.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See 12.7 NOI at *5, *6-*9,*9-*11, paras. 12, 14-24, 25-30.
\13\ See 12.7 NOI at *6-*9, paras. 14-24 (III.A. Potential
Methods for Sharing the Band), *9-*11, paras. 25-30 (III.B. Sunset
of Incumbent Services, Relocation and Cost-Sharing for New
Services).
\14\ See 12.7 NOI at *11-*12, paras. 31-32 (III.C. Potential
Licensing Approaches, Service and Technical Rules), specifically,
the Commission asked whether to assign new licenses on an exclusive-
use basis, through the issuance of new geographic-area overlay
licenses or consider other licensing approaches, such as non-
exclusive, site-based, or a tiered approach such as that used in the
Citizens Broadband Radio Service. Id. at *11, para. 31.
\15\ See 12.7 NOI at *12-*14, paras. 34 (describing incumbent
services in 12.2-12.7 GHz band), 35-38 (describing incumbent Federal
services in 13.25-13.4 GHz and 13.4-13.75 GHz bands), 39-40
(recognizing the need for services in these adjacent bands to
continue providing service and seeking comment on whether provisions
beyond the existing 12.7 GHz band fixed service protection levels
for adjacent bands would be necessary for mobile broadband or other
expanded-use operations in the 12.7 GHz band to prevent harmful
interference to operations in those adjacent bands).
\16\ See 12.7 NOI at *5, para. 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. In response to the 12.7 NOI, very few parties have argued that
the current balance of incumbents in the 12.7 GHz band should be left
unchanged and that the band should remain untouched. There is
substantial support for repurposing these frequencies for mobile
broadband or other expanded use and a significant number argue that the
band should be used for exclusive, fixed or mobile, flexible high-
powered use.\17\ Commenters assert that the next-generation wireless
technologies underpinning 5G, 5G Advanced, and 6G services will rely
depend on extremely high data rates, and the reliability, low latency,
and capacity that the 12.7 GHz band spectrum can provide.\18\ In
addition, standardization is already underway for 6G, and the 12.7 GHz
band has considerable capacity and opportunity for channel reuse,
making it a good fit for future 6G technologies,\19\ including high-
speed, low-latency, bandwidth-intensive applications, such as augmented
reality (AR), virtual reality (VR), telesurgery, and robotics.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See, e.g., AT&T Comments at 4; Competitive Carriers
Association Reply at 4 (CCA); CTIA Comments at 5; DISH Network Corp.
Comments at 5 (DISH); Ericsson Comments at 10; Nokia Comments at 3;
Qualcomm Comments at 7; T-Mobile USA, Inc. Comments at 3; U.S.
Cellular Corp. Reply at 2 (UScellular); Verizon Comments at 1; 5G
Americas Reply at 5; 5G for 12 GHz Coalition Comments at 3. But see
EIBASS Comments at 1; Ovzon Comments at 1. Several commercial
wireless interests note that more lower mid-band spectrum is needed
and that the 12.7 GHz band should be viewed as a complement to lower
mid-band spectrum--not a replacement. See AT&T Comments at 1;
Ericsson Comments at 9; T-Mobile Comments at 14; 5G Americas Reply
at 6.
\18\ See Ericsson Comments at 5; Qualcomm Comments at 3, 7.
Qualcomm notes that next generation technology advancements such as
active Antenna Systems (AAS) and Giga-MIMO will compensate for
attenuation in such high frequency bands. Qualcomm Comments at 5;
see also Nokia Comments at 2-3.
\19\ Ericsson Comments at 6, 8.
\20\ Consumer Technology Association Comments at 2 (CTA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. Accordingly, the Commission proposes to repurpose some or all of
the 12.7 GHz band for mobile broadband and other expanded uses and
seeks comment on this proposal. The Commission seeks comment on the
economic benefits of introducing mobile broadband or other expanded use
in all or part of the 12.7 GHz band. Commenters should consider the
economic value of current and future use cases for each type of use,
including benefits and opportunity costs to consumers and the Nation's
economy overall, as well as to unserved or underserved areas and
specialized market segments (e.g., education, telemedicine, and
manufacturing). Commenters should also address the benefits of
international harmonization both in terms of devices and network
deployments. In addition, the Commission encourages commenters to
consider the economic impact on consumers and businesses in rural
communities and areas that are unserved or underserved by current
broadband providers, as well as any economic impact on small
businesses.
7. The propagation characteristics of this frequency range will
require operators to transmit at relatively high power to achieve
meaningful coverage and capacity.\21\ Parties that support mobile
broadband use of the band argue that sharing regimes premised upon
relatively low power operations would not provide the coverage needed
to make investment worthwhile.\22\ Nokia argues that fixed paths--both
BAS/CARS, Fixed Microwave Services and Common Carrier and Operational
Fixed Services (OFS)--are concentrated in major cities along the coasts
and that allowing these operations to remain in the band would
discourage investment in mobile broadband expansion in areas that would
most benefit from it.\23\ Similar to fixed point-to-point links,
current mobile use of the band is limited to BAS/CARS television pickup
services generally licensed to operate ``over an area defined by a
point-radius or other wide-area basis,'' including large, densely-
populated areas with higher spectrum-use demands.\24\ Accordingly,
parties favoring mobile deployment in the band opposed sharing with
these incumbent systems.\25\ Some note that sharing should be used in
situations where clearing the band is not possible, which is not the
case in the 12.7 GHz band, where coordination, repacking and relocation
are available.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ CTIA Comments at 9; Rural Wireless Association, Inc.
Comments at 2-3 (RWA); Verizon Comments at 9; T-Mobile Reply at 4.
\22\ Ericsson states that sharing methods based on dynamic
sharing are not likely to optimize usage of the spectrum, and
instead ``will result in lower power levels, uncertainty regarding
access to the band, and limited investment and utility.'' Ericsson
Comments at 10. 5G Americas also argues that the Commission should
relocate incumbents instead of creating a low-power sharing regime.
5G Americas Comments at 4-5.
\23\ Nokia Comments at 4.
\24\ Nokia Comments at 5.
\25\ See, e.g., Nokia Comments at 4-5.
\26\ T-Mobile Reply Comments at 6-7; Verizon Comments at 5-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. The record, as well as the Commission's experience with other
bands, reflects that this proposed repurposing will enable next-
generation mobile and fixed broadband services in the 12.7 GHz band.
AT&T, T-Mobile, Verizon, Federated Wireless, Nokia, CTIA, Celona, 5G
for 12 GHz Coalition, 5G Americas, Dynamic Spectrum Alliance, CCA, and
DISH, all support bringing terrestrial mobile wireless services into
the 12.7 GHz band.\27\ Based on the Commission's well established
success in repurposing other bands for new services, such as Personal
Communications Service (PCS) and Advanced Wireless Services (AWS),
using exclusively assigned geographic-
[[Page 43941]]
area licenses,\28\ the Commission agrees with commenters that assigning
exclusive licenses is most likely to foster the innovation necessary
for an equipment ecosystem to develop in the band and best facilitate
the relocation and repacking of incumbents, which in turn will
accelerate deployment of mobile broadband and other expanded services
in the band.\29\ The Commission seeks comment on these proposals. The
Commission also discusses below and seeks comment on whether limited
sharing in the band among different types of services is possible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See AT&T Comments at 3-4; CTA Comments at 2; CTIA Comments
at 1, 6; DISH Comments at 1; Dynamic Spectrum Alliance Comments at
1-2 (DSA); Ericsson Comments at 1, 8; Federated Wireless Comments at
1; NCTA Comments at 1; Nokia Comments at 2-3; OneWeb Comments at 1;
Qualcomm Inc. Comments at 6 (Qualcomm); T-Mobile Comments at 1;
Verizon Comments at 1; 5G for 12 GHz Coalition Comments at 2-3; CCA
Reply at 2; Celona Reply at 2-3; US Cellular Reply at 2; 5G Americas
Reply at 4-5.
\28\ See e.g., infra note 52 and accompanying text; accord
Spectrum Frontiers 1st R&O and FNPRM, 31 FCC Rcd at 8027-28, paras.
29-30, 8045-46, paras. 78-79.
\29\ Indeed, the majority of the interests that advocate for
expanded fixed or mobile uses argue against sharing in the band and
for repacking or relocation of incumbents. See, e.g., CTIA Comments
at 1,7; Ericsson Comments at 11; Nokia Comments at 4-6; Qualcomm
Comments at 7; T-Mobile Comments at 10-12. 5G Americas states that
``the Commission should relocate incumbents to the greatest extent
possible rather than apply a low-power sharing regime'' and that
``[r]elocation expenses should be reimbursed from the pool of
auctions proceeds for relocation pursuant to a concrete deadline and
should be shared by all new 12.7 GHz entrants, on a pro rata
share.'' See 5G Americas Reply Comments at 6-7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. The National Association of Broadcasters and the Society of
Broadcast Engineers assert the 12.7 GHz band is generally not favored
by BAS for long-distance high reliability links; however, both assert
it is necessary for short distance links when no other frequencies are
available due to congestion of the 2 GHz and 6 GHz bands.\30\
Accordingly, although broadcaster commenters oppose relocation of
mobile BAS to other frequency bands, repacking to a discrete portion of
the 12.7 GHz band remains not only possible, but a favorable outcome
according to broadcasters, provided they are reimbursed and are
adequately protected.\31\ The Commission therefore proposes to repack
mobile BAS/CARS incumbents to a portion of the 12.7 GHz band.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ National Association of Broadcasters Comments at 3 (NAB);
Society of Broadcast Engineers Comments at 2-3 (SBE).
\31\ NAB Comments at 2; NAB Reply at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. The Commission acknowledges that some satellite industry
commenters do not support opening the 12.7 GHz band to terrestrial
mobile use and would instead prefer rule changes to intensify satellite
use of the band in the United States.\32\ Other satellite companies,
however, support examining whether the band can be opened to mobile or
other expanded terrestrial use, but they also note their concern that
the Commission take steps to ensure that services in adjacent bands are
not impacted by out-of-band emissions below 12.7 GHz.\33\ Furthermore,
as T-Mobile notes, satellite operators themselves recognize that there
has been limited use of the 12.7 GHz band in the U.S. for satellite
operations, which makes use of the band for mobile wireless operations
feasible.\34\ As noted by Nokia, ``of the total number of GSO
satellites, only eight of the 23 space stations are in the arc of
132.85 WL to 30 WL,'' and ``[r]egarding non-GSO satellites, the one
operational system does not have any U.S. earth stations licensed in
this band, another system is not operational, and a third has
surrendered the Ku-band portion of the grant.'' \35\ Therefore,
according to Nokia, ``the sharing of the band with satellite service
mostly refers to sharing with GSO FSS in the uplink direction (Earth-
to-space),'' and ``[w]hile more detailed analysis taking into account
the characteristics of both systems would be more conclusive, it is
expected that the mobile broadband service can share the band with
[existing] GSO FSS uplink with no restrictive conditions.'' \36\ The
Commission seeks comment on its proposal that satellite systems in the
band be conserved in their current state with no further expansion in
FSS use in the band.\37\ The Commission also seeks comment on the best
method for mobile and fixed systems to share with these remaining
satellite systems, while ensuring against harmful interference to such
satellite incumbents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ Eutelsat Comments at 2-3, 5-6; Intelsat/SES May 12, 2023 Ex
Parte at 2, B-1 (noting that FSS ability to operate in 12.7 GHz band
is constrained by footnote NG52 of the U.S. Table of Frequency
Allocations limiting use of the band to international systems);
Intelsat License LLC and SES Americom, Inc. Comments at 2; Hispasat
Reply at 3-4 (arguing that relocating incumbent FSS services out of
the 12.7 GHz band, as suggested by certain commenters, is not a
viable option because satellite operators have made significant
long-term investments, considering the 15-20-year lifespan of a GSO
satellite, in reliance on existing frequency allocations).
\33\ Kepler Communications Inc. Comments at 2-3 (Kepler); Space
Exploration Holdings, LLC Comments at 3 (SpaceX); WorldVu Satellites
Limited Comments at 4 (OneWeb).
\34\ See T-Mobile Reply at 9 (citing Eutelsat Comments at 6,
OneWeb Comments at 2-3). T-Mobile adds that given the restriction on
satellite use of the 12.7 GHz band due to NG52 which restricts the
majority of the 12.7 GHz band in the U.S. to international systems,
it would be unreasonable for satellite operators to claim a reliance
interest in expanded use of the band for satellite operations. T-
Mobile Reply at 9.
\35\ Nokia Comments at 6 citing 12.7 NOI at para. 11.
\36\ Nokia Comments at 6.
\37\ The Commission's proposal would not preclude the
possibility of a new U.S.-licensed satellite that would have no
visibility into the United States, as defined in the Communications
Act, i.e., states, territories, and possessions. 47 U.S.C. 153.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Future Licensing of Incumbent Services
11. Effective September 19, 2022, the International, Public Safety
and Homeland Security, Media, and Wireless Telecommunications Bureaus
announced a 180-day freeze on the filing of new or modification
applications for licenses or other authorizations in the 12.7 GHz
band.\38\ The purpose of this temporary freeze was to preserve the
current landscape of authorized operations in the 12.7 GHz band pending
the Commission's consideration of actions in this proceeding.\39\ In
light of the 12.7 NOI, the Commission extended the freeze pending the
outcome of GN Docket No. 22-352.\40\ Because the Commission proposes to
transition most of the band to exclusively assigned geographic-area
licenses for mobile broadband and other expanded uses, it proposes to
revise its rules to, in essence, make the freeze permanent.
Accordingly, the Commission proposes rule revisions to dismiss any new
space station license applications and new requests for access to the
U.S. market through non-U.S.-licensed space stations, or those parts of
any such applications and requests, that seeks to operate in the 12.7
GHz band. This would not apply to new applications for space stations
limited to serving earth stations outside the United States,
applications for modification of existing space station
authorizations,\41\ relocations of existing space stations pursuant to
the Commission's fleet management policy,\42\ or to applications for
replacement space stations.\43\ The Commission proposes rule revisions
to dismiss applications, or those portions of applications, received
for new earth station licenses, and modifications to earth stations
currently authorized, to operate in the 12.7 GHz band. This
[[Page 43942]]
would not apply to applications for renewal or cancellation of current
earth station authorizations,\44\ or modifications to correct location
or other data required in the earth station file.\45\ The Commission
also proposes rule revisions to dismiss applications received for new
or major modifications to fixed microwave, fixed or mobile BAS and CARS
stations to operate in the 12.7 GHz band. This change does not extend
to applications for renewal, cancellation or applications to modify
incumbent mobile BAS/CARS licenses to the mobile BAS/CARS repack band.
The Commission seeks comment on these proposals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ 180-Day Freeze on Applications for New or Modified
Authorizations for the 12.7-13.25 GHz Band, Public Notice, DA 22-
974, 2022 WL 4358635, at *1 (IB/PSHSB/MB/WTB Sept. 19, 2022).
\39\ Id. The Bureaus noted that the Commission or the Bureaus
might extend the freeze if doing so is deemed necessary to avoid
undermining the purpose of the freeze. Id.
\40\ See 12.7 Freeze Extension Order, FCC 22-80, at para. 44
(Commission extended freeze pending the outcome of GN Docket No. 22-
352).
\41\ 47 CFR 25.117.
\42\ 47 CFR 25.118(e) (permitting the relocation of a GSO space
station without prior authorization, but upon 30 days prior notice
to the Commission and any potentially affected licensed spectrum
user, provided that the operator meets specific requirements,
including a requirement that the space station will be relocated to
a position within 0.15[deg] of an orbital location
assigned to the same licensee).
\43\ 47 CFR 25.158(a)(2), 25.165(e)(1), (2).
\44\ 47 CFR 25.121(e).
\45\ See generally International Bureau Addresses Accuracy of
Earth Station Location Information in IBFS, Public Notice, 32 FCC
Rcd 9512 (IB 2017); 47 CFR 25.117.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Transition of Incumbent Operations
12. In the 12.7 NOI, the Commission inquired whether any incumbent
services in this band should be sunset,\46\ with existing operations
relocated from all or part of the band and whether new exclusive,
geographic-area-licenses should be required to protect or relocate
incumbent operations before the sunset date.\47\ The Commission
inquired whether the Emerging Technologies (ET) framework could be
applied to relocation of incumbents from this band and whether the
relocation procedures need to differ for one or more incumbent
uses.\48\ While the Commission proposes that FSS incumbents would not
be subject to relocation or sunset, the Commission proposes to apply
its ET procedures to relocate or repack incumbent terrestrial licensees
to introduce new services into a frequency band populated by incumbent
licensees. ET procedures represent a broad set of tools that the
Commission uses, revises, and updates to aid the process of making
spectrum available for new uses. Pursuant to these procedures, the
Commission will set a ``sunset date'' for the terrestrial incumbents in
this band--a date after which these licensees may not cause harmful
interference to new band entrants.\49\ Prior to the sunset date, the
new entrants may not cause harmful interference to terrestrial
incumbents but will be allowed to enter into mandatory negotiations
with these incumbents to gain early entry into the band and, if
necessary, may relocate these terrestrial incumbents to comparable
facilities.\50\ Because new entrants may have to relocate some of these
incumbents from a larger frequency range or greater geographic area
than where the new entrants will operate, the Commission may establish
a companion set of cost-sharing procedures.\51\ The Commission seeks
comment on these proposals and asks commenters addressing them to
outline how they would apply the ET framework to this band as discussed
further below for each type of terrestrial incumbent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ The sunset is the date by which all incumbent operations
cease to be protected from interference by new entrants. See, e.g.,
47 CFR 27.1253(a), 101.79(a).
\47\ 12.7 NOI at *9-*10, paras. 25-26.
\48\ 12.7 NOI at *10, para. 26; see, e.g., Amendment of Part 2
of the Commission's Rules (47 CFR part 2) to Allocate Spectrum Below
3 GHz for Mobile and Fixed Services to Support the Introduction of
New Advanced Wireless Services, Including Third Generation Wireless
Systems, ET Docket No. 00-258, Ninth Report and Order and Order, 21
FCC Rcd 4473, 4484, para. 19 (2006) (requiring new entrants to
relocate incumbents system-by-system rather than link-by-link due to
the unique operations of incumbents' systems); Expanding Flexible
Use of the 3.7 to 4.2 GHz Band, GN Docket No. 18122, Report and
Order and Order of Proposed Modification, 35 FCC Rcd 2343, 2416,
para. 182 (2020) (3.7 GHz Band Report and Order). Some transitions
were based on rules that called for negotiations when an ET licensee
proposed to operate a base station before the sunset date that would
interfere with an incumbent's operation. See, e.g., 47 CFR 101.69-
101.81. Other transitions had relatively short sunset dates. See,
e.g., 47 CFR 101.83-101.97. In the Broadcast Incentive Auction
Transition and for the 3.7-4.2 GHz (3.7 GHz band) Transition, the
Commission established cost catalogs for relocation expenses. See
Expanding the Economic and Innovation Opportunities of Spectrum
Through Incentive Auctions, GN Docket No. 12-268, 29 FCC Rcd 6567,
6820, para. 619 (2014) (delegating authority to the Media Bureau
``to . . . develop a final Catalog of Eligible Expenses, and make
other determinations regarding eligible costs and the reimbursement
process.''); see also Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Seeks
Comment on Preliminary Cost Category Schedule for 3.7-4.2 GHz Band
Relocation Expenses, Public Notice, 35 FCC Rcd 4440 (WTB May 2020).
The D.C. Circuit has upheld the Commission's authority to require
new entrants to relocate incumbent systems to comparable facilities.
See, e.g., Teledesic LLC v. FCC, 275 F.3d 75, 84-87 (D.C. Cir.
2001); see also Ass'n of Public-Safety Commc'ns Officials-Int'l,
Inc. v. FCC, 76 F.3d 395, 400 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (upholding
elimination of an exemption for public safety incumbents from a
relocation regime in which new licensees would pay all costs
associated with relocating incumbents to comparable facilities).
\49\ The sunset is the date by which all incumbent operations
cease to be protected from interference by new entrants. See, e.g.,
47 CFR 27.1253(a), 101.79(a). See infra Proposed Rules in GN Docket
No. 22-352, Sec. 27.1712. Regarding protection of incumbent
microwave systems prior to sunset and the trigger for relocation,
the Commission seeks comments on whether the references in Sec.
24.237(a) to TIA Telecommunications Systems Bulletin 10-F,
``Interference Criteria for Microwave Systems,'' May 1994, (TSB10-
F), and Appendix I of Subpart E of Part 24--A Procedure for
Calculating PCS Signal Levels at Microwave Receivers), and Sec.
24.237(d) Table 3 (Coordination Distance in Kilometers) need to be
updated or adjusted to account for use in the 12.7 GHz band.
\50\ See, e.g., Expanding Flexible Use of the 3.7 to 4.2 GHz
Band, GN Docket No. 18-122, Report and Order and Order of Proposed
Modification, 35 FCC Rcd 2343 (2020) (3.7 GHz Band Report and
Order), aff'd PSSI Global Services v. FCC, 983 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir.
2020) (permitting accelerated relocation of incumbent FSS space and
earth stations by new wireless entrants); Improving Public Safety
Communications in the 800 MHz Band, WT Docket 00-55, Report and
Order, Fifth Report and Order, Fourth Memorandum Opinion and Order,
and Order, 19 FCC Rcd 14969 (2004) (relocation of BAS, CARS, and
LTTS incumbents by new, nationwide wireless entrant); Redevelopment
of Spectrum to Encourage Innovation in the Use of New
Telecommunications Technologies, ET Docket No. 92-9, First Report
and Order and Third Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 7 FCC Rcd 6886
(1992) (relocation of FS incumbents by new wireless entrants). The
D.C. Circuit has upheld the Commission's authority to require new
entrants to relocate incumbent systems to comparable facilities.
See, e.g., Teledesic LLC v. FCC, 275 F.3d 75, 84-87 (D.C. Cir.
2001); see also Ass'n of Public Safety Communications Officials-
Int'l, Inc. v. FCC, 76 F.3d 395, 400 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (upholding
elimination of an exemption for public safety incumbents from a
relocation regime in which new licensees would pay all costs
associated with relocating incumbents to comparable facilities).
\51\ See Amendment to the Commission's Rules Regarding a Plan
for Sharing the Costs of Microwave Relocation, WT Docket No. 95-157,
Notice of Proposed Rule Making, 11 FCC Rcd 1923 (1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. Fixed Service
13. Based on its goal of making the 12.7 GHz band available for
advanced communications services, and supported by the record, the
Commission proposes to revise the Commission's rules to make all
incumbent point-to-point operations in the band under parts 74, 78, and
101 secondary to new mobile broadband/expanded use operations on a date
certain. The Commission seeks comment on whether this sunset date
should be three, five, or ten years after the first license for such
new operations is issued in the band. Should the sunset date differ
based on the incumbent service? Fixed microwave incumbents have a long
and successful history of relocation, including clearing the 1850-1990
MHz band for Personal Communications Service (PCS) and the 2110-2200
MHz bands for Advanced Wireless Services (AWS) bands.\52\ CTIA argues
that most incumbent services currently operating in the 12.7 GHz band
can be relocated to different media or spectrum bands without any loss
of functionality.\53\ For example, CTIA
[[Page 43943]]
estimates that nearly 80 percent of the BAS licenses in the 12.7 GHz
band are for fixed links that could be moved either to different fixed
microwave service bands or to alternative media such as fiber.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ See CTIA Comments at 7-8 & nn. 20, 21 (citing Amendment of
the Commission's Rules to Establish New Personal Communications
Services, GN Docket No. 90-314, Second Report and Order, 8 FCC Rcd
7700 (1993); Amendment of Part 2 of the Commission's Rules to
Allocate Spectrum Below 3 GHz for Mobile and Fixed Services to
Support the Introduction of New Advanced Wireless Services,
Including Third Generation Wireless Systems, Second Report and
Order, 17 FCC Rcd 23193 (2002); Service Rules for Advanced Wireless
Services in the 2000-2020 MHz and 2180-220 MHz Band, Report and
Order and Order of Proposed Modification, 27 FCC Rcd 16102, 16214,
para. 304 (2012)).
\53\ CTIA Comments at 7.
\54\ CTIA Comments at 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. Verizon notes that the 12.7 GHz band ``is home to approximately
1,697 Broadcast Auxiliary Service (BAS) call signs, 15 Cable Television
Relay Service (CARS) licenses, and 224 call signs for part 101 licensed
point-to-point microwave links.'' \55\ Verizon contends that ``[s]uch
technologies, which support public service and public safety among
other functions, could be relocated (and upgraded) consistent with the
Commission's longstanding Emerging Technologies principles.\56\ Nokia
believes that the Commission should relocate the limited number of
fixed links operating in the 12.7 GHz band.\57\ Ericsson states that
the Commission, ``[w]here possible, . . . should explore opportunities
to relocate incumbents'' from the 12.7 GHz band or, in certain
instances, consolidate, segment, and repack certain incumbent users
into a smaller portion of the band.\58\ 5G Americas supports the
relocation of incumbents from the 12.7 GHz band ``to the greatest
extent possible.'' \59\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\55\ Verizon Comments at 6-7.
\56\ Verizon Comments at 7.
\57\ Nokia Comments at 4. Nokia notes that ``[w]hile the
nationwide number of fixed point-to-point links is limited, BAS
fixed links (1,172 fixed paths) are concentrated in major cities
along the coasts'' and ``[o]ther licensed fixed service links, such
as Common Carrier and Operational Fixed Services (OFS) are
concentrated in the West Coast cities and states.'' Id. Nokia
recommends that the Commission relocate such services to other fixed
microwave bands. Id.
\58\ Ericsson Comments 11.
\59\ 5G Americas Reply Comments 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. The record reflects a strong consensus among parties that the
Commission utilizes its Emerging Technologies policies to transition
and sunset all incumbent point-to-point licenses in the band under
parts 74, 78, and 101.\60\ The Commission agrees that doing so will
appropriately balance the operational needs of incumbents with the
public interest benefits of expanded use of the spectrum. The
transition of fixed links is relatively straightforward and entails the
relocation of independent fixed point-to-point microwave links which
can proceed link-by-link basis consistent with its Emerging Technology
policies. The Commission therefore proposes to apply Sec. Sec. 101.69,
101.73, and 101.75 and amend Sec. Sec. 74.690 and 78.40 to govern
relocation of incumbent fixed services from this band.\61\ The
Commission further proposes that, three, five, or ten years after the
first mobile broadband/expanded use license is issued in the band,
incumbent point-to-point licenses in the band would become secondary
(operate on an unprotected, non-interference basis) to new licensed
operations. The Commission seeks comment on this proposal including the
appropriate sunset period for point-to-point licenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ See, e.g., AT&T Comments at 4; CTIA Comments at 6-7; Nokia
Comments at 3-5; T-Mobile Comments at 3-4; Competitive Carriers
Association Reply Comments at 3; 5G Americas Reply Comments at 6-7.
But see Celona Inc. Comments at 1-2 (noting that ``Celona does not
advocate sunsetting or relocating incumbent users, but instead
supports coexisting with the incumbents through a DSMS model.'').
\61\ See infra Proposed Rules in GN Docket No. 22-352, 47 CFR
74.690, 78.40, 101.69, 101.173, 101.75.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Mobile BAS/CARS
16. The Commission seeks comment on its proposal to repack
incumbent mobile BAS/CARS licensees into a portion of the 12.7 GHz band
to be designated for mobile BAS/CARS operations. The 12.7 GHz band has
approximately 450 BAS and CARS call signs that authorize land mobile
television pickup stations. These are effectively mobile news gathering
technologies that operate over an area defined by a point-radius or
other wide-area basis, making them the most likely to potentially
interfere with or receive interference from any new mobile broadband
co-channel entrants. While these land mobile pickup transmitter
licensees coordinate with each other and share the spectrum among
multiple licensees in any given area,\62\ coordination among these
incumbents and new mobile broadband or other expanded use operations is
infeasible given that the former need to operate temporary fixed links
or mobile transmitters anywhere in their market, often on short notice,
and that the latter will be ubiquitous. For this reason, the Commission
asked in the 12.7 NOI if mobile BAS/CARS operations could be relocated
to a portion of the band or else to a different band or technology.\63\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\62\ See infra Proposed Rules in GN Docket No. 22-352, 47 CFR
part 74 (Sec. Sec. 74.600-74.690), part 78 (Sec. Sec. 78.1-
78.115).
\63\ 12.7 NOI at *14, para. 28. Ericson recognizes that mobile
TV operations ``could make sharing the 12.7 GHz band with new
terrestrial mobile broadband services more challenging'' and that
``[o]pportunities to relocate incumbents or consolidate and segment
the band should be prioritized,'' such as ``repack[ing] certain
existing uses into a smaller portion of the band.'' Ericsson
Comments at 10-11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. Given the varied and widespread nature of mobile BAS (403 call
signs) and mobile CARS (50 call signs) operations, Verizon encourages
the Commission to propose relocating these operations from the
band.\64\ Nokia also urges relocation of mobile BAS/CARS operations
because transmitters in the television pickup service are often
licensed to operate over an area defined by a point-radius or other
wide-area basis and across the entire frequency band, with large
operating areas that include major cities.\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\64\ Verizon Comments at 7.
\65\ Nokia Comments at 5. Nokia contends that ``mechanisms to
enable coexistence with mobile incumbents are usually more complex
than in case of fixed incumbents.'' Id. It also notes that
``[r]estrictions on the mobile broadband deployments in such areas
to allow sharing with mobile incumbents would decrease the value of
the band.'' Id. at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. Significantly, NAB and Scripps Broadcasting recognize that it
may be possible to repack broadcaster operations in the 12.7 GHz band
into a smaller segment of the band, assuming the Commission adopts
rules that will fully protect those broadcaster operations from harmful
interference caused by new entrants and ensure that broadcaster do not
bear any costs associated with relocation.\66\ SBE cautions that the
relocation of mobile BAS and other incumbent broadcast operations would
be impractical and expensive, because (1) there is no ``clear
alternative offering the flexibility necessary for mobile ENG and other
broadcaster operations; and (2) ``even if there were a clear
alternative . . . relocation would ``render broadcasters' incumbent
mobile newsgathering equipment obsolete--resulting in significant costs
to replace and deploy new equipment (for use in other spectrum or
within a newly reserved portion of existing spectrum), and for which
broadcasters' expenses would need to be compensated.'' \67\ As CTIA
observes, in 2000 the Commission adopted rules to repack mostly mobile
BAS/CARS operations, similar to those in the 12.7 GHz band, from the
1990-2110 MHz band to the 2025-2110 MHz band using more spectrally
efficient equipment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\66\ NAB Comments at 2, 7-8; Scripps Broadcasting Comments at 1,
5. NAB emphasizes that, any relocation of broadcasters' operations
must be fully funded. NAB Reply Comments at 5; see also Scripps
Broadcasting Comments at 5. Broadcasters have made significant
investments in 12.7 GHz operations, and the costs of relocation may
be substantial. NAB Reply at 5. Even frequency changes within the
12.7 GHz band may require antenna replacements that are costly or
impractical. Id.; see also Scripps Broadcasting Reply at 5.
\67\ SBE Comments at 4-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. The Commission proposes to repack mobile BAS/CARS incumbents
into a segment of the 12.7 GHz band to be designated for mobile BAS/
CARS use, and the Commission seeks
[[Page 43944]]
comment on this proposal. The Commission proposes to retain 25
megahertz for mobile BAS/CARS operation and to repack existing
operations into this dedicated band. Is 25 megahertz adequate to
accommodate current mobile BAS/CARS incumbent operations in the 12.7
GHz band? If no, how much spectrum would be required for mobile BAS/
CARS use after repacking? Where within the 12.7 GHz band should these
repacked operations be located? Would locating the repack band at the
top, bottom, or both ends of the 12.7 GHz band more effectively serve
to mitigate potential interference, from new 12.7 GHz band mobile
broadband or other expanded use operations, to operations in adjacent
bands? Are the existing provisions that reserved 13.15-13.2125 GHz for
mobile BAS/CARS inside a 50 km radius of 100 television markets
relevant to this question? \68\ Commenters should discuss advantages
and disadvantages of different repacking options, included economic
considerations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\68\ See 47 CFR 2.106 note NG53, 74.602(a) note 2; 78.18(l)
(note NG53 revised as 47 CFR 2.106(d)(53), at 88 FR 37318, June 7,
2023, effective July 7, 2023). See also Amendment of Part 101 of the
Commission's Rules to Facilitate the Use of Microwave for Wireless
Backhaul and Other Uses and to Provide Additional Flexibility to
Broadcast Auxiliary Service and Operational Fixed Microwave
Licensees, Report and Order (76 FR 59559 (Sept. 27, 2011)), Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (76 FR 59614 (Sept. 27, 2011)), and
Memorandum Opinion and Order (76 FR 59559 (Sept. 27, 2011)), 26 FCC
Rcd 11614, 11626 para. 24 (2011) (Commission excluded FS from
13.150-13.200 MHz nationwide because that spectrum was already
reserved for TV pickup operations in 100 markets).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. The Commission seeks comment on the typical use of this band by
mobile BAS/CARS incumbent licensees. For example, is this band
typically used by BAS licensees for traditional ENG type operations
from a mobile pickup van or truck back to the studio or central
receiver site? Or is this band used primarily for shorter more
localized transmission from cameras or backpack transmitters to the ENG
truck? Are there other typical uses for mobile transmitters in this
band? Is equipment in this band tunable within the band? Is equipment
in this band capable of scaling bandwidth to different sized channels?
How intensively is this band used in practice by incumbent licensees
for mobile operations compared to other BAS bands such as 2 GHz and 6
GHz? Is equipment currently being manufactured and marketed for mobile
BAS/CARS operation in this band? Can new 12.7 GHz band equipment used
for studio-transmitter links be reconfigured for ENG or other mobile
BAS/CARS uses?
21. The Commission seeks comment on how its Emerging Technologies
procedures should apply to incumbent use of non-fixed or mobile
operations in the band. Whereas the transition of fixed links is
relatively straightforward, in that it entails the relocation of
independent fixed point-to-point microwave links, and can proceed link-
by-link on an as-needed basis, the integrated nature of mobile BAS and
CARS operations makes link-by-link relocation infeasible. It is further
complicated by incumbent use of frequency-agile, non-fixed or mobile
stations.\69\ The Commission has previously required that the BAS and
CARS operations be cleared from transitioning bands on a market-by-
market basis before any new entrant could begin operations.\70\ It may
also be necessary for a new entrant to relocate more non-fixed or
mobile BAS and CARS facilities than an interference analysis might
indicate is technically necessary in order to meet the comparable
facility requirement for relocating non-fixed or mobile BAS or CARS
operations.\71\ Should a new entrant therefore be obligated to relocate
all incumbent non-fixed or mobile BAS and CARS operations in all
affected BAS and CARS markets, including those markets where the new
entrant provides partial, minimal, or even no service? The Commission
seeks comment on its proposals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\69\ Further, while BAS and CARS mobile operations are licensed
for specific geographic markets, in some cases they operate
nationwide.
\70\ See Amendment of Section 2.106 of the Commission's Rules to
Allocate Spectrum at 2 GHz for use by the Mobile Satellite Service,
ET Docket No. 95-18, Third Report and Order and Third Memorandum
Opinion and Order, 18 FCC Rcd 23638, 23653-23660 paras. 29-42
(2003); Amendment of Part 2 of the Commission's Rules to Allocate
Spectrum Below 3 GHz for Mobile and Fixed Services to Support the
Introduction of New Advanced Wireless Services, Including Third
Generation Wireless Systems, ET Docket No. 00-258, Sixth Report and
Order, Third Memorandum Opinion and Order and Fifth Memorandum
Opinion and Order, 19 FCC Rcd 20720, 20746-20753 paras. 57-73 (2004)
(AWS Sixth Report and Order); 47 CFR 74.690(e)(1), 78.40(f)(1).
\71\ Service Rules for Advanced Wireless Services in the 1915-
1920 MHz, 1995-2000 MHz, 2020-2025 MHz and 2175-2180 MHz Bands,
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 19 FCC Rcd 19263, 19285 para. 52
(2006); 47 CFR 74.690(d), 78.40(d)-(e). For example, operations of
non-fixed or mobile BAS or CARS operations in an adjacent market may
need to be relocated even though the new entrant does not initiate
operations in that adjacent market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
22. Once incumbent mobile BAS/CARS have transitioned into a
repacked band, should the Commission consider whether to allow the
following to operate in some or all of the mobile BAS/CARS repack band:
incumbent fixed point-to-point (PTP) BAS, or all incumbent fixed PTP
(some of which may have tunable equipment) so long as such fixed PTP
links would not intersect with incumbent mobile BAS/CARS authorized
mobile operating areas, and new mobile BAS/CARS operations? \72\ If the
repack band is reserved nationwide for mobile BAS/CARS (limited to
incumbents during a transition period) are there any scenarios in which
the Commission should consider permitting licensed expanded-use
services to operate in portions of the repack band (spectral or
geographical) after the transition period? Could an automated spectrum
management system at a later design date be needed in the mobile BAS/
CARS repack band, or could shared access occur without the use of
database managed sharing systems? \73\ The Commission seeks comment on
these issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\72\ See 47 CFR 101.147(a) n.34.
\73\ 47 CFR 96.53-96.66 (Spectrum Access System for the Citizens
Broadband Radio Service); id. Sec. Sec. 15.713-15.715 (White space
database); id. Sec. 15.407(k) (Automated Frequency Coordination
(AFC) system for 6 GHz devices). No AFC system operators have yet
been designated by the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Fixed Satellite Service
23. Space stations. As noted in its 12.7 NOI, 27 space stations'
records specify use of the 12.7 GHz band with all 27 specifying
downlink (space-to-Earth) in the 12.7-12.75 GHz band, 20 specifying
uplink (Earth-to-space) in all or a segment of the 12.75-13.25 GHz
band, and four specifying uplink (Earth-to-space) in the 12.7-12.75 GHz
band and in all or a segment of the 12.75-13.25 GHz band.\74\ More
generally, of the total number of GSO satellites, the Commission noted
in the 12.7 NOI that only eight of the 23 space stations are in orbital
locations with good visibility to all or significant portions of
CONUS.\75\ Of the four satellite records associated with three non-
geostationary orbit (NGSO) systems, the Commission noted that the one
operational system does not have any U.S. earth stations licensed in
this band, another system is not operational, and a third has
surrendered the Ku-band portion of the grant.\76\ The Commission is not
proposing to sunset or to require new entrants to relocate FSS
incumbents, which the Commission proposes to define as any FSS space
station or earth station authorized to serve or operate in the United
States in accordance with the Table of Allocations based on an
[[Page 43945]]
application or petition for market access filed before September 19,
2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\74\ 12.7 NOI at *5, para. 11.
\75\ Id. (Commission noted that these eight space stations are
in the arc of 132.85 WL to 30 WL.)
\76\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
24. Verizon states, however, that ``the Commission's recent action
to open the band to new [NGSO] satellites has substantially changed the
spectral landscape, despite the goal of the freeze on processing of new
applications in this frequency range.'' \77\ According to Verizon,
``the Commission should seek further comment on how new wireless
operations can coexist with the substantial number of new NGSO FSS
deployments.'' \78\ In addition, Verizon states that ``[t]o the extent
FSS operations are not relocated from the band, the Commission should
seek comment on how it might leverage the prior-coordination
requirements for terrestrial and space services to facilitate
coexistence among operations in the band.'' \79\ The Commission seeks
comment accordingly. The Commission notes, however, that SpaceX
supports the Commission's decision to explore use of the 12.7 GHz band
rather than the 12.2 GHz band for terrestrial mobile broadband and
other expanded use. SpaceX asserts that ``[w]hile [it] is licensed for
both bands, it nonetheless joins the other commenters supporting the
Commission's shift in focus to the upper 12 GHz band.'' \80\ In any
event, SpaceX's ``[o]perations of [NGSO] systems in the 12.75-13.25 GHz
(Earth-to-space) frequency band with earth stations in the United
States are restricted to individually licensed earth stations in
accordance with footnote NG57 to the U.S. Table of Frequency
Allocations, 47 CFR 2.106, NG57.'' \81\ Additionally, SpaceX's
``authorization is subject to modification to bring it into conformance
with any rules or policies adopted by the Commission in the future.\82\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\77\ Verizon Comments at 8 & n.26 (citing SpaceX Gen2 Order, FCC
22-91, 2022 WL 17413767, at *1 para. 1, *18, para. 42 (authorizing
the construction, deployment, and authorization of up to 7,500
satellites (Earth-to-space) in the 12.75-13.25 GHz band, among other
segments)).
\78\ Id.
\79\ See Verizon Comments at 7-8.
\80\ SpaceX Reply at 1. See also Letter from Kimberly M. Baum,
Vice President, Spectrum Engineering & Strategy, WorldVu Satellites
Limited, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, GN Docket No. 22-352
et al. at 2 (filed Mar. 20, 2023) (OneWeb March 20, 2023 Ex Parte)
(``OneWeb urged closing out the 12.2-12.7 GHz proceeding and
shifting the Commission's focus to the 12.7-13.25 GHz band which
holds more promise for expanded terrestrial use.'').
\81\ SpaceX Gen2 Order, FCC 22-91 at para. 135(h) (noting that
the licensing of earth stations (i.e. filed after Sept. 19, 2022)
for operations in the 12.75-13.25 GHz will be subject to filing
freeze on applications for new or modified authorizations for the
12.7-13.25 GHz band.).
\82\ SpaceX Gen2 Order, FCC 22-91 at para. 135(hh) (stating that
the ``authorization is subject to modification to bring it into
conformance with any rules or policies adopted by the Commission in
the future. [And, that] . . . any investments made toward operations
in the bands authorized [by the] Order by SpaceX in the United
States assume the risk that operations may be subject to additional
conditions or requirements as a result of any future Commission
actions . . . [including, but not limited to] . . . any conditions
or requirements resulting from any action in the proceedings
associated with . . . GN Docket 22-352 . . .'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
25. Earth stations. As noted in the 12.7 NOI, 27 locations are
associated with 43 incumbent earth stations.\83\ There are eight earth
station authorizations for ESIM or temporary fixed operations that do
not specify a specific set of geographic coordinates.\84\ Of the 35
remaining earth stations, there are eight instances of co-location with
other earth stations, resulting in the 27 locations.\85\ A majority
(23) of those Earth stations are authorized for uplink transmission
(Earth-to-space) in the 12.7 GHz band.\86\ Additionally, 20 earth
stations are authorized for downlink reception (space-to-Earth) in the
lower 50 megahertz of the band (i.e., 12.7-12.75 GHz), in many
instances together with other frequencies in the lower-adjacent Ku-
band.\87\ The Commission also noted that, for FSS operations, downlink
earth stations are more likely to suffer harmful interference from
terrestrial systems than uplink earth stations (where the victim
receiver is at the space station far from the terrestrial systems).\88\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\83\ See 12.7 NOI at *5, para. 11.
\84\ Id. An ESIM is operated by remote control from a ground-
based network and monitoring center that is specified in the
authorization. See 47 CFR 25.271. ``Of the 20 earth station
authorizations for uplink [sic] (space-to-Earth) in the 12.7-12.75
GHz band, eight are for Earth Stations in Motion (ESIMs) and may or
may not involve operations in these frequencies in the United
States.'' 12.7 NOI at n.28 (the 20 earth stations, and therefore the
eight indicated for ESIM have a ``downlink'' designation.).
\85\ See 12.7 NOI at *5, para. 11. In addition, the Department
of Defense (DoD) leases commercial satellite services in the 12.7-
13.25 GHz band as end users. Id.
\86\ See 12.7 NOI at *5, para. 11.
\87\ See 12.7 NOI at *5, para. 11.
\88\ 12.7 NOI at *10, para. 28.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
26. The Commission proposes to grandfather the 23 incumbent earth
stations in the 12.75-13.25 GHz band that operate in accordance with
the United States and ITU's band allocation for Region 2 by operating
earth-to-space. No additional earth stations would be authorized in the
12.7 GHz band. The Commission proposes that non-conforming incumbent
Earth stations that operate by receiving in the space-to-Earth
direction in 12.7-12.75 GHz in the United States may continue on a non-
interference basis and have no right to protection from harmful
interference.\89\ The Commission seeks comment on potential
international implications of its proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\89\ See Application of Fugro-Chance, Inc., Order and
Authorization, 10 FCC Rcd 2860, 2860, para. 2 (IB 1995) (stating
that a waiver of Sec. 2.106--the U.S. Table of Frequency
Allocations--is appropriate ``when there is little potential for
interference into any service authorized under the Table of
Frequency Allocations and when the non-conforming operator accepts
any interference from authorized services'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
d. Incumbent Status--Licensing Data
27. The Commission proposes to define incumbent operations entitled
to protection or relocation (until the sunset date), or for
grandfathered status, based on the facilities authorized in the
Commission licensing records.\90\ In the Order, see FCC 23-36, paras.
143-147 (FR 2023-13502), published elsewhere in this issue of the
Federal Register, the Commission directs fixed and mobile BAS and CARS
licensees under parts 74 and 78, for each of their authorizations to
use the 12.7 GHz band, to certify the accuracy of all information
reflected on each license, including whether the facilities are
operating as authorized. If a licensee is unable to make such a
certification for a given license, it must cancel or modify the license
in accordance with the Commission's rules. For BAS and CARS licenses,
the Commission proposes to limit eligibility for incumbent status in
the 12.7 GHz band to those licenses for which the licensee has timely
filed the certification required in the Order in ULS or COALS,
respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\90\ Licensing data for fixed and mobile BAS under part 74 and
Fixed Microwave under part 101 is in ULS. Licensing data for fixed
and mobile CARS is in COALS. Licensing data for FSS stations is in
MyIBFS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
28. Although the Commission does not require other incumbents to
provide additional information on their existing operations at this
time, in the Order the Commission directs the Bureaus, in coordination
with the Office of Economics and Analytics (OEA), to consider whether
additional information should be collected from some or all 12.7 GHz
band incumbents. In the event that additional information is required
from incumbents, the Commission proposes to limit eligibility for
incumbent status to those incumbents that file such required
certifications or data. Because the Commission proposed to use these
licensing data to inform its deliberations regarding the future use of
the 12.7 GHz band, including possible interference avoidance
coordination or relocation of facilities, or grandfathered status that
could require future licensees to accept harmful interference from
existing
[[Page 43946]]
operations, the Commission encourages all licensees to timely submit
their data and to update their information in the event of a change in
any of the operational parameters.
e. Cost-Sharing
29. When the Commission adopts a transition plan that involves the
relocation of incumbents, new entrants sometimes have to relocate an
incumbent from a larger frequency range or greater geographic area than
where the new entrant will operate, thereby clearing the incumbent for
the benefit of others. In such cases, the Commission has often
developed cost sharing requirements, so that all licensees that derive
a benefit from a relocation action share the responsibility for the
costs of that relocation, regardless of whether they are the first to
deploy their system or deploy their systems after other licensees have
already deployed and incurred spectrum-clearing costs.\91\ The
Commission seeks comment on whether it should adopt cost-sharing
procedures applicable to the relocation of incumbents in the 12.7 GHz
band. If so, how should the Commission apportion the expenses of a
relocation among those new entrants that benefit from the relocation?
What type of formula should be applied? Would that formula differ for
the reimbursement of relocated fixed microwave services and non-fixed
or mobile BAS and CARS operations? If so, how would it differ, and why?
For example, if the Commission was to impose an obligation on a new
entrant to relocate all non-fixed and mobile BAS and CARS on a market-
by-market basis prior to commencing operations, should it obligate all
new entrants that are licensed to operate in a cleared market to pay a
pro rata share of those costs? \92\ What type of test should determine
whether a new entrant has triggered a cost-sharing obligation for a
relocated microwave link or one or more repacked mobile BAS/CARS
systems authorized in any part of a new entrant's licensed area? For
example, the Commission adopted a Proximity Threshold Test to determine
whether an AWS licensee triggered a cost-sharing obligation for
relocated microwave links.\93\ If the Commission was to adopt a similar
Proximity Threshold Test here, how would the input data in Sec.
27.1168(a)(3)(i) differ to reflect the higher band of microwave
operations in the 12.7 GHz band?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\91\ 3.7 GHz Band Report and Order, 35 FCC Rcd at 2445, para.
250; Service Rules for Advanced Wireless Services H Block--
Implementing Section 6401 of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job
Creation Act of 2012 Related to the 1915-1920 MHz and 1995-2000 MHz
Bands, WT Docket No. 12-357, Report and Order, 28 FCC Rcd 9483,
9548, para. 167 (2013); Amendment of Part 2 of the Commission's
Rules to Allocate Spectrum Below 3 GHz for Mobile and Fixed Services
to Support the Introduction of New Advanced Wireless Services,
Including Third Generation Wireless Systems, ET Docket No. 00-258,
Ninth Report and Order and Order, 21 FCC Rcd 4473, 4478, para. 8
(2006); Amendment to the Commission's Rules Regarding a Plan for
Sharing the Costs of Microwave Relocation, WT Docket No. 95-157,
Memorandum Opinion and Order on Reconsideration, 15 FCC Rcd 13999,
14004, para. 10 (2000).
\92\ See AWS Sixth Report and Order, 19 FCC Rcd at 20753 paras.
72-73 (stating the first entrant may seek reimbursement from
subsequently entering licensees for a proportional share of the
first entrant's costs in clearing BAS spectrum, on a pro rata basis
according to the amount of spectrum each licensee is assigned);
Improving Public Safety Communications in the 800 MHz Band, WT
Docket 02-55, Fifth Report and Order, Eleventh Report and Order,
Sixth Report and Order, and Declaratory Ruling, 25 FCC Rcd 13874,
13893 para. 42 (2010) (800 MHz Fifth Report and Order) (stating that
an AWS entrant will ``enter the band'' on the date that the grant of
its long-form application becomes a final action and any AWS entrant
that enters the band prior to the sunset date will be required to
reimburse an entrant that has relocated BAS incumbents a pro rata
share of the relocation costs).
\93\ 47 CFR 27.1168. In comparison, the Commission determined
that an AWS licensee triggered a reimbursement obligation for
relocated BAS operations in the 2 GHz band upon grant of its long-
form application. See 800 MHz Fifth Report and Order, 25 FCC Rcd at
13893, para. 42 (stating that an AWS entrant will ``enter the band''
on the date that the grant of its long-form application becomes a
final action).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
30. Would there be a need to designate one or more clearinghouses
to administer the cost-sharing plan and calculate the amount of each
beneficiary's reimbursement obligation in accordance with any formula
that would be set forth in the Commission's rules? \94\ Are there
opportunities to incentivize the relocation of some or all types of
incumbents on an accelerated basis? \95\ Would some form of the
accelerated relocation payment approach such as was used for the 3.7-
4.2 GHz band (3.7 GHz band) be appropriate to accelerate clearing some
or all incumbent services out of some or all of the 12.7 GHz band? \96\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\94\ A cost-sharing clearinghouse is a third-party that is
typically designated by the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau
pursuant to delegated authority. See Expanding Flexible Use of the
3.7 to 4.2 GHz Band, GN Docket 18-22, Public Notice, 35 FCC Rcd
11859 (WTB 2020); Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Designates
Clearinghouses That Will Administer the 2 GHz PCS Relocation Cost-
Sharing Plan, DA 96-1522, Public Notice, 11 FCC Rcd 10634 (WTB
1996); see also Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Finds CTIA and
PCIA Qualified to Administer the Cost-Sharing Plan for Licensees in
the 2.1 GHz Bands, WT Docket 02-353, Public Notice, 21 FCC Rcd 11265
(WTB 2006).
\95\ Based on the unique record presented for the 3.7 GHz band,
the Commission adopted two Accelerated Relocation Deadlines--a one
year Phase I deadline and a three-year Phase II deadline--``for
incumbent space station operators that voluntarily relocate on an
accelerated schedule (with additional obligations and incentives for
such operators).'' 3.7 GHz Band Report and Order, 35 FCC Rcd at
2413, para. 168.
\96\ See id. at 2413-14, paras. 168-72 (accelerated relocation).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Alternative Approaches for Sharing the Band
31. Here the Commission explores the second alternative option
raised in the 12.7 NOI for making the 12.7 GHz band available for
mobile broadband and other expanded use: implementation of certain
sharing methodologies among incumbents and new entrants. In the 12.7
NOI, the Commission sought detailed proposals for promoting coexistence
or sharing between potential new terrestrial mobile broadband or other
expanded use and existing incumbent licensees in the 12.7 GHz band,
rather than sunsetting or relocating incumbents, or repacking of the
band.\97\ The Commission also sought comment on sharing methodologies
such as static or dynamic sharing, using a database or spectrum
management system, adopting a nonexclusive licensing system, or
application of long-term sensing technology.\98\ The Commission noted
that, while an automated spectrum management systems have been proven
to be effective for devices in the part 96 Citizens Broadband Radio
Service (CBRS), for part 15 white space devices, and for 6 GHz
unlicensed devices, there are several important differences between
them.\99\ Under the white space and 6 GHz unlicensed rules, devices
must query a database system for a list of available frequencies and
permissible operating power on a periodic basis, e.g., once per hour or
once per day, and a device may select any available operating frequency
and permissible power level from a list provided by the database.\100\
The CBRS Spectrum Access Systems (SAS) have greater interactivity with
managed devices and may require devices to change frequency or power
level or to cease operation within 60 seconds as necessary to prevent
interference to incumbent services or
[[Page 43947]]
devices with a higher spectrum access priority.\101\ The sharing
methods that have been proven for white space devices and CBRS, in
conjunction with new or developing sharing technologies, may be used in
the 12.7-13.25 GHz band to maximize the use of spectrum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\97\ 12.7 NOI at *6, para. 14.
\98\ Id. at *6-*8, paras. 16-21.
\99\ Id. at *7, para. 17.
\100\ Id. at *7, para. 17 (citing 47 CFR 15.711(h)(1)-(2),
15.407(k)(8)(iv)). While the D.C. Circuit did remand a portion of
the 6 GHz Report and Order to the Commission for further discussion,
this limited remand concerned a commenter's arguments regarding
unlicensed devices operating without a spectrum management system
rather than higher powered devices controlled by the 6 GHz band
automated frequency coordination (AFC) system. See Unlicensed Use of
the 6 GHz Band, ET Docket No. 18-295, Report and Order and Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 35 FCC Rcd 3852 (2020), aff'd in part
and remanded in part, AT&T Servs. Inc., v. FCC, 21 F.4th 841, 853-54
(D.C. Cir. 2021).
\101\ 12.7 NOI at *7, para. 17 (citing 47 CFR 96.39(c)(2)).
Relative to such sharing approaches, the Commission also seeks
comments on whether any third-party entity that manages,
coordinates, or facilitates use of devices by those who are not
individually licensed should be required to collect and maintain
data documenting operation of devices, including the identity of
those persons or entities operating such devices. If so, how long
should this data should be retained and made available to the
Commission upon request?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
32. Federated Wireless proposes a Dynamic Spectrum Management
System (DSMS) as an effective and efficient way to maximize the use of
the 12.7 GHz band, with new and innovative uses of spectrum, while
protecting incumbent operations.\102\ The DSMS would operate by
acquiring information about the incumbent's spectrum use by several
methods such as querying a database like the Universal Licensing System
(ULS), receiving notifications through an automated portal system,
sensing incumbent use, or a combination of two or more of these
methods.\103\ Federated Wireless also proposes that the Commission
adopt a multi-tiered licensing framework in the 12.7 GHz band, similar
to the three-tiered regulatory framework used by the SAS in the CBRS
band.\104\ The three-tier regulatory framework used by the CBRS band
enables different classes of users while providing interference
protection to incumbents in the 3550-3700 MHz band.\105\ Other
commenters, such as the Dynamic Spectrum Alliance, NCTA, and the Open
Technology Institute and Public Knowledge, all support adopting a
shared-licensing framework, emphasizing the benefits that have been
achieved in the TV White Space, CBRS, and 6 GHz band.\106\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\102\ Federated Wireless Comments at 2.
\103\ Federated Wireless Comments at 3.
\104\ Federated Wireless Comments at 5.
\105\ See 47 CFR 96.11(a).
\106\ DSA Comments at 2; NCTA Comments at 4; Open Technology
Institute and Public Knowledge Comments at 8 (OTI & PK).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
33. The Society of Broadcast Engineers claims that neither an
database-driven spectrum management system nor a spectrum-sensing
approach to spectrum sharing will provide adequate protection for
electronic news-gathering operations in the band.\107\ It adds that
spectrum sensing is unable to detect the one-way transmission equipment
used in mobile newsgathering, and database-driven systems like the an
automated frequency coordination system will not precisely capture
mobile BAS operations, which by definition do not have a fixed location
found in any database.\108\ In its comments, Verizon discourages the
use of new and complex dynamic sharing methods or database coordination
requirements that may limit investments and complicate new mobile
broadband deployments into the 12.7 GHz band.\109\ Instead, it
recommends the use of an exclusive-use, flexible-rights licensing
framework, as well as coordination, repacking, and relocation that is
better suited for incumbent operations.\110\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\107\ SBE Comments at 5.
\108\ SBE Comments at 5.
\109\ Verizon Comments at 1-2, 5-6.
\110\ Verizon Comments at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
34. The Commission seeks comment on using an automated spectrum
management system such as the automated frequency coordination (AFC)
systems used in the 6 GHz band or spectrum access systems used in CBRS
as a method to enable spectrum sharing in the 12.7 GHz band as an
alternative to relocating incumbents or repacking the band. To
determine whether a new mobile broadband device can operate at a
particular location on a given frequency, the device would be required
to obtain either a list of permissible frequencies from an automated
spectrum management system prior to transmitting or a list of
prohibited frequencies on which it cannot transmit. The Commission
envisions the automated spectrum management system to be a database
that is simple to implement. The Commission seeks comment on this
alternative proposal. What capabilities should be incorporated into the
automated spectrum management system? Should it use a centralized model
where all data and computations are done in a central location? In this
case, the device would establish a connection with the automated
spectrum management system, provide its location and technical details,
and the automated spectrum management system will communicate the list
of permissible frequencies (or a list of prohibited frequencies) back
to the device. Or should the automated spectrum management system's
architecture be de-centralized where the device maintains a local
database of incumbent operations and performs the necessary
computations to determine which frequencies and power levels can be
used without causing harmful interference? Under such a model, how
would the local database within the device be kept up to date? What are
the trade-offs, including the costs and benefits, between a centralized
versus a decentralized model in terms of efficiency, device complexity,
and ability to protect incumbent licensee operations?
35. Because BAS was not present in the portions of the 6 GHz band
where the AFC systems manage access to spectrum, mobile BAS/CARS was
not addressed in the 6 GHz band AFC implementation. The mobile nature
of these BAS/CARS operations makes it more difficult to manage spectrum
access in real time. Electronic news gathering trucks, while they are
mobile by definition, operate in a fixed fashion and direct
transmissions towards fixed receive sites when broadcasting from the
location of scheduled sporting or news events. Mobile BAS/CARS
equipment may also be used for short-range connectivity such as
relaying signals from a camera to a news gathering truck. For these
types of itinerant mobile-fixed operation, a mobile BAS/CARS licensee
could provide advanced notice of its planned operation to enable the
automated spectrum management system to protect the BAS operations from
harmful interference. The Commission seeks comment or proposals on
whether these sorts of planned mobile operations can be accommodated on
an AFC or SAS-like system. The Commission also seeks comment on whether
mobile BAS/CARS operations in this band are, in fact, similar to BAS
use in the 6 GHz band, and if not whether there are additional
considerations that an automated spectrum management would need to
address specific to this band. Could such a system be adapted to
accommodate unplanned, unscheduled news or other events?
36. Should the automated spectrum management system determine
frequency availability using the proposed permissible power limits for
base stations, mobile stations, and transportable stations or should it
instead determine frequency availability at power levels less than the
maximum, and calculate a list of available frequencies and the maximum
power permitted on each one? If the automated spectrum management
system calculates the maximum power for each frequency, how would it
control the power levels of mobile broadband devices to ensure that
they operate at permissible levels? How should frequency availability
information be reported to the devices? Should the automated spectrum
management system report availability for discrete frequency bands,
e.g., 10 or 20 megahertz channels, or should it simply report the range
or ranges of available frequencies? Alternatively, should the automated
spectrum
[[Page 43948]]
management system simply list the range or ranges of unavailable
frequencies?
37. The Commission seeks comment on whether device registration
with the automated spectrum management system is necessary. Under a
registration requirement, a mobile broadband device would transmit
identifying information along with its location to the automated
spectrum management system before receiving a list of permissible
frequencies.\111\ Alternatively, a device under a centralized system
architecture could provide only its location data and the automated
spectrum management system would provide it with the list of
permissible channels for that location. Under a decentralized system
architecture, registration would not necessarily be required as the
device only needs periodic updates of the local fixed service operating
environment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\111\ Fixed white space devices and Citizens Broadband Radio
Service Devices are required to register certain information with
the white space database or Spectrum Access System, including the
device's location, antenna height above ground, device
identification information, and contact information for the device's
operator. 47 CFR 15.713(g), 96.39(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
38. The Commission seeks comment on the types of security
requirements that would be necessary for an automated spectrum
management system that manages mobile broadband devices in the 12.7 GHz
band. White space devices and databases, CBRS devices and the SAS, as
well as 6 GHz AFC systems and unlicensed devices are required to
incorporate security measures to ensure that devices communicate only
with authorized databases, that all communications and interactions
between a database and devices are accurate and secure, and that
unauthorized parties cannot access or alter a database, or the list of
available frequencies sent to a device.\112\ Are similar requirements
necessary or appropriate for devices and an automated spectrum
management system in the 12.7 GHz band? Are any additional requirements
necessary? Does the Commission need to specify security requirements
for devices to ensure that the software within them cannot be easily
modified to enable operation on frequencies other than those indicated
as available by the automated spectrum management system?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\112\ See 47 CFR 96.39(f), 15.407(k)(8)(v), 15.713(l).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Licensing and Operating Rules
1. Part 27
39. To encourage intensive investment in, and robust deployment of,
next-generation wireless networks, the Commission has adopted or
proposed licensing approaches for other mid-band spectrum that are
tailored to the unique characteristics of each band. The Commission
proposes and seeks comment on service-specific rules for the 12.7 GHz
band. In addressing these issues, commenters should discuss the costs
and benefits associated with these proposals and any alternatives that
commenters propose.
40. The Commission proposes to license the spectrum under its
flexible-use part 27 rules, which permit licensees to provide any fixed
or mobile service consistent with the permitted allocations, subject to
rules necessary to prevent or minimize harmful interference. With the
exception noted below, under this proposal, new mobile broadband and
other expanded use licensees in the 12.7 GHz band would comply with
licensing and operating rules that are applicable to all part 27
services,\113\ including flexible use,\114\ regulatory status,\115\
foreign ownership reporting,\116\ compliance with construction
requirements,\117\ renewal criteria,\118\ permanent discontinuance of
operations,\119\ partitioning and disaggregation,\120\ and spectrum
leasing.\121\ The Commission seeks comment generally on this approach.
With respect to technical rules and performance requirements, the
Commission intends to adopt rules based on commenter concerns and its
experience and expertise. Finally, the Commission proposes to make its
licensing, authorization, and service rules governing the 12.7 GHz band
applicable nationwide, i.e., within the Contiguous United States
(CONUS) as well as the non-contiguous states, territories, and
possessions. The Commission seeks comment on this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\113\ See Amendment of Parts 1, 22, 24, 27, 74, 80, 90, 95, and
101 To Establish Uniform License Renewal et al., Second Report and
Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Order, 32 FCC
Rcd 8874 (2017) (WRS Renewal Reform 2nd R&O and FNPRM) (amending
several of the rules applicable to part 27 services).
\114\ Section 303(y) provides the Commission with authority to
provide for flexibility of use if: ``(1) such use is consistent with
international agreements to which the United States is a party; and
(2) the Commission finds, after notice and opportunity for public
comment, that (A) such an allocation would be in the public
interest; (B) such use would not deter investment in communications
services and systems, or technology development; and (C) such use
would not result in harmful interference among users.'' Balanced
Budget Act of 1997, Public Law 105-22, 111 Stat. 251, 269-69; 47
U.S.C. 303(y). See also 47 CFR 27.2, 27.3.
\115\ 47 CFR 27.10.
\116\ 47 U.S.C. 310; 47 CFR 27.12.
\117\ 47 CFR 27.14(k).
\118\ Id. Sec. 1.949.
\119\ Id. Sec. 1.953.
\120\ Id. Sec. 1.950.
\121\ Id. Sec. Sec. 1.9001 through 1.9080.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. 12.7 GHz Band Plan
41. The Commission's goal in this proceeding is to make as much of
the 12.7 GHz band available for mobile broadband or other expanded uses
as possible in order to facilitate next-generation uses of spectrum
that are increasingly necessary in the modern, connected world. To
promote effective use of the 12.7 GHz band, the Commission proposes a
technologically neutral policy for licensing the band. That is, the
Commission does not make any technological choices or prohibitions, or
prefer any particular kind of technology. The Commission does not
propose a duplex gap, or distinct blocks for base and mobile that would
presume or prohibit FDD or TDD deployments. The Commission seeks
comment on this proposal. Are there interference issues that the
Commission is not currently anticipating that this regime would create?
The Commission ask commenters to address interference concerns between
FDD and TDD, explain how they could coexist in the band, and discuss
coordination and interference rules that must apply if both were to be
permitted. In section I.B.3.b above (Mobile BAS/CARS), the Commission
proposes to set aside 25 megahertz to repack mobile BAS/CARS
incumbents.
3. Spectrum Block Sizes for New Licenses
42. Currently, the 12.7 GHz band is licensed for satellite, BAS/
CARS fixed and mobile use, and other fixed uses. Under its band plan
proposal, most of the 550 megahertz would be made available to new
entrants for mobile or other expanded uses, with a small portion of the
band set aside to accommodate repacked mobile BAS/CARS incumbents. The
Commission seeks comment on the appropriate block sizes for these new
licenses to best promote efficient and robust use of the band for next-
generation wireless technologies. Several commenters note the
importance of larger block sizes to the deployment of mobile broadband
and other expanded uses; indeed, some commenters indicate that as
broadband technologies evolve, operators will be required to have
contiguous 100 megahertz blocks to deliver next-generation
broadband.\122\ In light of this
[[Page 43949]]
concern, the Commission believes that 100 megahertz blocks will produce
the best environment for 5G and future 6G deployments, as large block
sizes support faster data speeds and better coverage for next-
generation deployments.\123\ Additionally, the Commission believes 100
megahertz blocks will afford adequate flexibility to prospective
licensees in terms of system design.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\122\ See, e.g. AT&T Comments at 4; Qualcomm Comments at 7
(noting that a 5G base station with 100 MHz bandwidth provides sub-
meter positioning accuracy, and that more bandwidth will allow for
more precise positioning and improve overall network performance);
Verizon Comments at 9; Ericsson Reply at 10-11; 5G Americas Reply at
6.
\123\ ``[T]he Commission should prioritize large bandwidths such
as 50-megahertz or 100-megahertz channel blocks, the latter which
`have become international best practice and are implemented in the
majority of 5G-leading markets.' '' Verizon Comments at 9 (quoting
GSMA, 5G Spectrum: GSMA Public Policy Position, at 5 (June 2022),
https://www.gsma.com/-spectrum/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/5G-Spectrum-Positions.pdf).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
43. The Commission seeks comment on this proposal (100 MHz blocks)
and on how to authorize any spectrum blocks less than 100 megahertz
depending on the size of the mobile BAS/CARS repack band. Commenters
offering an alternative proposal should detail the advantages and
disadvantages of their favored approach, including any costs and
benefits, based on what they know about the technical requirements of
the respective technologies that either use or could use the band. The
Commission recognize that some commenters favor smaller blocks of 50
megahertz.\124\ If the Commission adopts smaller sized blocks, should
the Commission allow licensees to aggregate the use of these separate
licenses into wider bandwidths while retaining the performance
requirements of each individual license? Would this approach help
ensure that spectrum is put to use, as compared to larger block sizes?
Are there any additional considerations that the Commission should take
into account in determining the spectrum block sizes to be used for new
licenses in this band?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\124\ Competitive Carriers' Association Reply at 5; T-Mobile
Comments at 14; US Cellular Reply at 5. Some Commenters, such as T-
Mobile, argue that 100 megahertz blocks would orphan a 50 megahertz
block, or otherwise require the Commission to license the band with
blocks of varying size. T-Mobile Comments at 14; US Cellular
Comments at 6. The Commission notes that under its band plan
proposal, some spectrum would be designated for repacking incumbent
mobile BAS/CARS operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Geographic License Area Sizes
44. Consistent with its approach in several other bands used to
provide fixed and mobile services, the Commission proposes to license
the 12.7 GHz spectrum on an exclusive, geographic-area basis.\125\
Geographic-area licensing provides flexibility to licensees, promotes
efficient spectrum use, and helps facilitate rapid assignment of
licenses. The Commission seeks comment on this approach, including the
costs and benefits of adopting a geographic area licensing scheme. In
the event that a party does not support using geographic licensing, it
should explain its position, describe what type of licensing scheme it
supports, and identify the costs and benefits associated with its
alternative licensing proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\125\ See, e.g., 47 CFR 27.6 (h), (i) (AWS-1 and AWS-4,
respectively).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
45. In determining the appropriate geographic license size, the
Commission considers several factors, including: (1) facilitating
access to spectrum by both small and large providers; (2) providing for
the efficient use of spectrum; (3) encouraging deployment of wireless
broadband services to consumers, especially those in rural areas and
Tribal lands; and (4) promoting investment in and rapid deployment of
new technologies and services.\126\ In light of these statutory
considerations, the Commission proposes to issue flexible use licenses
on a Partial Economic Area (PEA) basis.\127\ The Commission asks
commenters to discuss and quantify the economic, technical, and other
public interest considerations of licensing on a PEA basis. The
Commission observes that the question of geographic license area sizes
intersects with the question of whether to issue exclusive or shared
licenses: those that favor exclusive licenses often prefer PEAs or
larger, whereas those that favor shared licensing regimes prefer
smaller areas, such as counties.\128\ Because the Commission proposes
to license the band exclusively, the Commission also proposes PEAs. In
its judgment, this area size will also help promote rural deployments
by facilitating access to spectrum by small and regional service
providers and beyond.\129\ The Commission seeks comment on licensing
the 12.7 GHz band on a PEA basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\126\ See, e.g., Service Rules for Advanced Wireless Services in
the 1.7 GHz and 2.1 GHz Bands, Report and Order, 18 FCC Rcd 25162,
25174, para. 31 (2003) (AWS-1 Service Rules R&O).
\127\ See 47 CFR part 27, subpart A, appendix A--List of Partial
Economic Areas with Corresponding Counties.
\128\ But see RWA Comments at 2 (arguing for counties and not
PEAs for licensed area size).
\129\ See, e.g., US Cellular Reply at 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
46. Some commenters seek smaller areas, such as counties.\130\ They
argue that these smaller areas help smaller businesses and rural
areas.\131\ Could smaller license areas increase the possibility of
interference between adjacent areas and complicate a licensee's ability
to fully deploy services using their licensed spectrum in their service
areas? \132\ If so, are there other reasons that would nevertheless
support adopting smaller license areas such as promoting competition?
\133\ Would smaller or larger areas promote or complicate cost-sharing
for relocation of incumbents? Are there any additional considerations
that the Commission should take into account when determining the
geographic license areas sizes for new licenses in the 12.7 GHz band
when weighing the factors listed above? For example, could a smaller
license area help promote deployment in Tribal areas? The Commission
notes that several commenters suggest providing priority access to
spectrum over Tribal lands to Tribal entities.\134\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\130\ RWA Comments at 2-3; OTI & PK Comments at 7; WISPA Reply
at 1-2, 7; see also see Letter from Traci Biswese, Vice President &
Associate General Counsel, NCTA, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary,
FCC, GN Docket No. 22-352, at 3 (May 11, 2023) (NCTA May 11, 2023 Ex
Parte).
\131\ RWA points out that the propagation characteristics of the
band warrant adoption of smaller-sized license areas. RWA Comments
at 3. In proposing PEAs, the Commission is making the judgement that
it propagates sufficiently far to justify PEA-sized areas. The
Commission also seeks comments on this approach.
\132\ See T-Mobile Reply at 6.
\133\ See NCTA May 11, 2023 Ex Parte at 3.
\134\ See Open Technology Institute and Public Knowledge May 10,
2023 Ex Parte at 3 (``With regard to creating a rural Tribal window
for any spectrum authorized for new licensees in the 12.7 GHz band,
the success of the 2.5 GHz window demonstrates the enormous value to
Tribes of creating the opportunity for greater spectrum access on
Tribal lands. This would also be consistent with the Memorandum of
Understanding between the Department of the Interior and the
Department of Commerce National Telecommunications and Information
Administration, 11/23/2022. Available at https://www.bia.gov/sites/
default/files/dup/inline-files/mou_esb46-009818_doi-fcc-
ntia_electromagnetic_spectrum_on_tribal_lands_2022-11-
23_final_fcc_ntia_doi_signed_508.pdf''). See also Tribal Ready May
10, 2023 Ex Parte (``The Commission has previously recognized the
value of Tribal set asides in promoting deployment as recently as
the 2.5 GHz band. The 12 GHz band can and should also be an option
to help Native Americans close the digital divide.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. License Term and Renewal
47. The Commission proposes to establish a 10-year license term for
new mobile broadband and other expanded use licenses in the 12.7 GHz
band. The Commission believes that a 10-year term serves its goal of
providing licensees with flexibility to develop this spectrum as the
market demands and to employ innovative technologies which may not be
available immediately upon licensing. The Commission acknowledges that
the Commission has adopted license terms longer than 10 years to
account for delays in relocating incumbent operations. In this case,
however, because the existing use of the
[[Page 43950]]
band is relatively light, the Commission is proposing its standard 10-
year license term along with an additional year (relative to some
services) to meet the proposed interim buildout requirement. The
Commission also proposes to apply its general renewal requirements for
wireless radio service licenses.\135\ The Commission seeks comment on
these proposed license term and renewal requirements, as well as on the
costs and benefits of these proposals.\136\ Are there alternative
license terms that might be better suited for this band?\137\ If an
alternative license term is better, what impact would it have on
investment or deployment, particularly for smaller or rural entities,
and how could the Commission determines its costs and benefits?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\135\ See 47 CFR 1.949 (Application for renewal of license). The
WRS Renewal 2nd R&O and FNPRM adopted a unified framework for
construction, renewal, and service continuity rules for flexible use
geographic licenses in the Wireless Radio Services. See Amendment of
Parts 1, 22, 24, 27, 74, 80, 90, 95, and 101 to Establish Uniform
License Renewal et al., WT Docket No. 10-112, Second Report and
Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Order, 32 FCC
Rcd 8874 (2017) (WRS Renewal Reform 2nd R&O and FNPRM). Accord,
Expanding Flexible Use of the 3.7 to 4.2 GHz Band, GN Docket No. 18-
122, Report and Order and Order of Proposed Modification, 35 FCC Rcd
2343, 2390, para. 106 (2020) (3.7 GHz Report and Order).
\136\ The Communications Act does not specify a term limit for
wireless radio services licenses. The only statutory limit on
license terms is eight years for licenses in the broadcast services.
See 47 U.S.C. 307(c)(1); see also 47 CFR 73.1020(a).
\137\ See, e.g., 47 CFR 27.14(k) (AWS-3 licenses have a 12-year
initial license terms and 10-year renewal terms), (l) (600 MHz band
licenses have 12-year initial license terms and 10-year renewal
terms).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. Performance Requirements
48. The Commission establishes performance requirements to ensure
that spectrum is intensely and efficiently used. The Commission has
applied different performance and construction requirements to
different spectrum bands based on considerations relevant to those
bands.\138\ The Commission continues to believe that performance
requirements play a critical role in ensuring that licensed spectrum
does not lie fallow.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\138\ See, e.g., Service Rules for Advanced Wireless Services H
Block--Implementing Section 6401 of the Middle Class Tax Relief and
Job Creation Act of 2012 Related to the 1915-1920 MHz and 1995-2000
MHz Bands, Report and Order, 28 FCC Rcd 9483, 9558-59, para. 195
(2013) (requiring 40 percent population coverage within four years
of initial grant and 75 percent population coverage within 10 years
of initial grant); see also Amendment of the Commission's Rules with
Regard to Commercial Operations in the 1695-1710 MHz, 1755-1780 MHz,
and 2155-2180 MHz Bands, Report and Order, 29 FCC Rcd 4610, 4659-60,
para. 135 (2014) (requiring 40 percent population coverage within
six years of initial grant and 75 percent population coverage within
12 years of initial grant); Expanding the Economic and Innovation
Opportunities of Spectrum Through Incentive Auctions, Report and
Order, 29 FCC Rcd 6567, 6877-78, para. 764 (2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
49. In response to the 12.7 NOI,\139\ AT&T, T-Mobile, Intelsat,
Ericsson and others note that the 12.7 GHz band shares many
characteristics with millimeter wave (mmW) spectrum.\140\ Despite these
similarities, T-Mobile and Intelsat suggest that performance
requirements for the 12.7 GHz band should not necessarily be similar to
those that apply to the mmW spectrum, given the difficulties mmW bands
have had fulfilling buildout requirements.\141\ Moreover, T-Mobile
suggests that the Commission carefully consider buildout requirements
and allow for flexibility based on the unique needs of the spectrum
being used and the geographic area being served.\142\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\139\ See, e.g., 12.7 NOI at *11, para. 31.
\140\ AT&T Comments at 1; Ericsson Comments at 8; T-Mobile
Comments at 14; Intelsat Reply at 11-12.
\141\ T-Mobile Comments at 14-15 (citing an NTIA Study that
examined outdoor propagation in the 37-40 GHz band in Boulder,
Colorado); Intelsat Reply at 11; T-Mobile Reply at 4-5.
\142\ T-Mobile Comments at 15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
50. As with other part 27 services, the Commission proposes to
adopt specific quantifiable benchmarks for different types of
operations. For the 12.7 GHz band, the Commission proposes to require
licensees offering mobile or point-to-multipoint services to provide
reliable signal coverage and offer service to at least 30% to 45% of
the population in each of their license areas within five years \143\
of the license issue date (interim performance benchmark), and to at
least 60% to 80% of the population in each of their license areas
within ten years from the license issue date (final performance
benchmark).\144\ The Commission seeks comment on this proposal
including the specific population coverage percentage appropriate for
the interim and final benchmarks. The Commission recognizes that,
relative to the recently established 3.45 GHz Service, which has
buildout deadlines at years four and eight,\145\ the Commission is
proposing an additional year for 12.7 GHz band licensees to meet the
proposed first buildout requirement and an additional two years to meet
the second buildout requirement. The Commission believes this
additional time is warranted given the lack of industry standards and
12.7 GHz band mobile broadband equipment. The Commission proposes
licensees providing fixed point-to-point service would be required to
demonstrate within five years of the license issue date (interim
performance benchmark) that they have four links operating and
providing service, if the population within the license area is equal
to or less than 268,000. If the population within the license area is
greater than 268,000, a licensee relying on point-to-point service
would need to demonstrate that it has at least one link in operation
and providing service, either to customers or for internal use, per
every 67,000 persons within a license area. The Commission proposes to
require licensees relying on point-to-point service to demonstrate
within ten years of the license issue date (final performance
benchmark) that they have eight links operating and providing service,
either to customers or for internal use, if the population within the
license area is equal to or less than 268,000. If the population within
the license area is greater than 268,000, the Commission proposes to
require a licensee relying on point-to-point service to demonstrate it
is providing service and has at least two links in operation per every
67,000 persons within a license area.\146\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\143\ For AWS-4, AWS H Block, and 3.45 GHz Service, the first
performance benchmark is 4 years from the date of the initial
license and the second performance benchmark is 8 years from the
date of the initial license for AWS-4 and 3.45 GHz Service and 10
years for H Block. For services with incumbent transitions, the
first performance benchmark ranges from 6 years (AWS-3, 600 MHz) to
8 years (3.7 GHz Service) from the date of the initial license, and
the second performance benchmark is 12 years (AWS-3, 600 MHz, 3.7
GHz Service). See 47 CFR 27.14(q), (r),(s),(t),(v),(w).
\144\ The Commission's proposals and questions comport with
actions taken for other licenses taking into account the unique
characteristics of the 12.7 GHz band, e.g., presence of incumbents
and the location of this mid-band spectrum--significantly higher
than 3.7 GHz but significantly lower than mmW spectrum. See, e.g.,
47 CFR 27.14(v)(1) (requiring a 3.7 GHz Service licensee providing
mobile or point-to-multipoint service to cover 45% of population
within eight years of initial grant and 80% population coverage
within 12 years of initial grant); 47 CFR 27.14(w)(1)(i) (requiring
a 3.45 GHz Service licensee providing mobile or point-to-point
service to cover 45% of population within 4 years and 80% of
population within 8 years of initial grant); 47 CFR 30.103,
30.104(a) (requiring a UMFUS licensee providing mobile or point-to-
multipoint service to cover 40% of population within ten years).
\145\ See 47 CFR 27.14(w)(1)(i).
\146\ See, e.g., 47 CFR 27.14(v)(1) (requiring a 3.7 GHz Service
licensee providing point-to-point service to demonstrate within 8
years and 12 years of initial grant that they are operating four
links and eight links, respectively, and providing service to
customers or for internal use if the license area is equal to or
less than 268,000, and if the population is greater than 268,000,
that they are operating at least one link within 8 years and at
least two links within 12 years and providing service to customers
or for internal use per every 67,000 persons within a license area);
27.14(w)(1)(ii) (requiring a 3.45 GHz Service licensee providing
point-to-point service to demonstrate within 4 years and 8 years of
initial grant that they are operating four links and eight links,
respectively, and providing service to customers or for internal use
if the license area is equal to or less than 268,000, and if the
population is greater than 268,000, that they are operating at least
one link within 4 years and at least two links within 8 years and
providing service to customers or for internal use per every 67,000
persons within a license area); 47 CFR 30.103, 30.104(a) (requiring
a UMFUS licensee providing point-to-point service to demonstrate
within 10 years of initial grant that they are operating four links
and providing service to customers or for internal use if the
license area is equal to or less than 268,000, and if the population
is greater than 268,000, that they are operating at least one link
and providing service to customers or for internal use per every
67,000 persons within a license area).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 43951]]
51. The Commission also proposes alternate Internet of Things (IoT)
performance requirements in order to allow for flexibility to provide
services potentially less suited to a population coverage metric.
Specifically, the Commission proposes that licensees providing IoT-type
services would have flexibility to demonstrate that they offer
geographic area coverage of at least 25% to 35% of the license area at
the interim (five-year) performance benchmark, and geographic area
coverage of at least 50% to 65% of the license area at the final (ten-
year) performance benchmark.\147\ The Commission seeks comment on this
proposal including the specific geographic area coverage percentage
appropriate for the interim and final benchmarks metrics appropriate in
the 12.7 GHz band. Commenters should discuss the appropriate metric to
accommodate such service offerings or other innovative services in the
12.7 GHz band, as well as the costs and benefits of an alternative
approach. The Commission also seeks comment on whether to adopt
renewal-term performance obligations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\147\ See, e.g., 47 CFR 27.14(v)(2) (requiring a 3.7 GHz Service
licensee providing Internet of Things service to offer geographic
area coverage of 35% of the license area within 8 years of initial
grant and geographic area coverage of 65% of the license area within
12 years of initial grant); 27.14(w)(1)(iii) (requiring a 3.45 GHz
Service licensee providing Internet of Things service to offer
geographic area coverage of 35% of the license area within 4 years
of initial grant and geographic area coverage of 65% of the license
area within 8 years of initial grant); 47 CFR 30.103, 30.104(b)
(requiring a UMFUS licensee providing Internet of Things or other
services deployed along non-traditional lines to offer geographic
area coverage of 25% of the license area within 10 years of initial
grant).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
52. Compliance Procedures. The Commission proposes that to
demonstrate compliance with these performance requirements, licensees
shall use the most recently available decennial U.S. Census Data at the
time of measurement and shall base their measurements of population or
geographic area served on areas no larger than the Census Tract level.
The population or area within a specific Census Tract (or other
acceptable identifier) would be deemed served by the licensee only if
it provides reliable signal coverage to and offers service within the
specific Census Tract (or other acceptable identifier). To the extent
the Census Tract (or other acceptable identifier) extends beyond the
boundaries of a license area, a licensee with authorizations for such
areas may include only the population or geographic area within the
Census Tract (or other acceptable identifier) towards meeting the
performance requirement of a single, individual license. If a licensee
does not provide reliable signal coverage to an entire license area,
the license must provide a map that accurately depicts the boundaries
of the area or areas within each license area not being served. Each
licensee also must file supporting documentation certifying the type of
service it is providing for each licensed area within its service
territory and the type of technology used to provide such service.
Supporting documentation must include the assumptions used to create
the coverage maps, including the propagation model and the signal
strength necessary to provide reliable service with the licensee's
technology.
53. Penalty for Failure to Meet Performance Requirements. Along
with performance benchmarks, the Commission proposes to adopt
meaningful and enforceable penalties for failing to meet those
benchmarks. The Commission proposes that, in the event a licensee fails
to meet the first performance benchmark, the licensee's final benchmark
and license term would be reduced by two years, thereby requiring it to
meet the final performance benchmark two years sooner (at 8 years into
the license term) and reducing its license term to 8 years. If a
licensee fails to meet the final performance benchmark for a particular
license area, its authorization for each license area in which it fails
to meet the performance requirement shall terminate automatically
without Commission action. The Commission seeks comment on this
proposal and on which penalties will most effectively ensure timely
buildout.
54. The Commission seeks comment on how, in the event a 12.7 GHz
band licensee's authority to operate terminates, its spectrum rights
should become available for reassignment pursuant to the licensing
framework the Commission adopts for this band. The Commission also
seeks comment on whether, consistent with the Commission's rules for
other part 27 licenses, the Commission should require that any 12.7 GHz
band flexible use licensee that forfeits its license for failure to
meet its performance requirements be precluded from regaining that
license. Finally, the Commission seeks comment on other performance
requirements and enforcement mechanisms that would effectively ensure
timely buildout.
7. Open Eligibility
55. The Commission proposes to adopt an open eligibility standard
for licenses in the 12.7 GHz band, consistent with established
Commission practice.\148\ An open eligibility standard should encourage
the development of new technologies, products, and services, while
helping to ensure efficient use of this spectrum. The Commission seeks
comment on this assumption. The Commission notes that an open
eligibility approach would not affect citizenship, character, or other
generally applicable qualifications that may apply under its
rules.\149\ Commenters should discuss the costs and benefits of the
open eligibility proposal on competition, innovation, and investment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\148\ The Commission has determined in a number of services that
eligibility restrictions on licenses may be imposed only when open
eligibility would pose a significant likelihood of substantial harm
to competition in specific markets and when an eligibility
restriction would be effective in eliminating that harm. This
approach relies on market forces absent a compelling showing that
regulatory intervention to exclude potential participants is
necessary. See, e.g., Service Rules for Advanced Wireless Services
in the 2000-2020 MHz and 2180-2200 MHz Bands, Report and Order and
Order of Proposed Modification, 27 FCC Rcd 16102, 16193, paras. 241-
42 (2012); Service Rules for the 698-746, 747-762 and 777-792 MHz
Bands, WT Docket No. 06-150 et al., Second Report and Order, 22 FCC
Rcd 15289, 15381, 15383-84, paras. 253, 256 (2007) (700 MHz Second
Report and Order); Allocations and Service Rules for the 71-76 GHz,
81-86 GHz and 92-95 GHz Bands, WT Docket No. 02-146, Report and
Order, 18 FCC Rcd 23318, 23346-47, para. 70 (2003).
\149\ Id. sections 301, 308(b), 310.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. Mutually Exclusive Applications for New Licenses
56. As discussed above, the Commission proposes to use an exclusive
geographic area licensing scheme for the 12.7 GHz spectrum, which will
permit the filing of mutually exclusive applications. The Commission's
statutory authority to resolve mutually exclusive applications for
initial licenses through a system of competitive bidding has lapsed.
Accordingly, in the event the Commission determines to adopt a mutually
exclusive application approach, the Commission seeks comment on how it
should resolve mutually exclusive applications for new initial licenses
in the 12.7 GHz band in light of the lapse in its authority to use
competitive bidding. In the event that the Commission's statutory
authority
[[Page 43952]]
with respect to auctions is restored, the Commission delegates
authority to WTB and the Office of Economics and Analytics to seek
comment on appropriate competitive bidding rules and procedures,
consistent with prior Commission guidance.
9. Mobile Spectrum Holdings Policies
57. Spectrum is an essential input for the provision of mobile
wireless services, and ensuring access to and the availability of
sufficient spectrum is crucial to promoting the competition that drives
innovation and investment.\150\ The Commission has held that the
Communications Act requires a close examination of the impact of
spectrum aggregation on competition, innovation, and the efficient use
of spectrum to ensure that spectrum is allocated and assigned in a
manner that serves the public interest, convenience and necessity, and
avoids the excessive concentration of licenses.\151\ In this NPRM, the
Commission seeks comment generally on whether to adopt limitations on
the aggregation of spectrum holdings in the 12.7 GHz band in order to
meet its statutory requirements and to ensure competitive access to the
band. The Commission seeks comment on whether the technical and market
characteristics of the 12.7 GHz band warrant such limitations and, if
so, whether implementation of such limitations should be through the
Commission's total spectrum screen, a separate screen, a limit on
initial licensing, or other means, as discussed below.\152\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\150\ Communications Marketplace Report, GN Docket No. 22-203,
Report, FCC 22-103, at 64, para. 82 (Dec. 30, 2022) (2022
Communications Marketplace Report); see NCTA May 11, 2023 Ex Parte
at 2 (arguing for the importance of promoting competition through
avoiding excessive concentration).
\151\ Policies Regarding Mobile Spectrum Holdings Expanding the
Economic Innovation Opportunities of Spectrum Through Incentive
Auctions, WT Docket No. 12-269, Report and Order, 29 FCC Rcd 6133,
6137, para. 8 (2014) (Mobile Spectrum Holdings Report and Order).
\152\ In 2004, the Commission established its framework for
case-by-case review of spectrum aggregation (and market
concentration), in which it established a total spectrum screen
``trigger'' of approximately one-third of the total suitable and
available spectrum for commercial mobile radio services.
Applications of AT&T Wireless Inc. and Cingular Wireless Corporation
For Consent To Transfer Control of Licenses and Authorizations,
Memorandum Opinion and Order, 19 FCC Rcd 21522, 21525, 21568-69,
paras. 4, 106-112 (2004) (Cingular-AT&T Wireless Order). This screen
was subsequently expanded and applied to mobile telephony/broadband
services. See, e.g., Applications of Cellco Partnership d/b/a
Verizon Wireless and Atlantis Holdings LLC for Consent to Transfer
Control of Licenses, Authorizations, and Spectrum Manager and De
Facto Transfer Leasing Arrangements, WT Docket No. 08-95, Memorandum
Opinion and Order and Declaratory Ruling, 23 FCC Rcd 17444, 17469-
70, paras. 45-46 (2008). In 2008, the Commission determined that its
case-by-case review would also apply to the initial licensing of
spectrum acquired at auction, similar to the Commission's analysis
of secondary market transactions. Union Telephone Company and Cellco
Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless Applications for 700 MHz Band
Licenses, Auction No. 73, Order, 23 FCC Rcd 16787, 16791-92, 16796,
paras. 9, 18 (2008). In 2014, the Commission determined that it
would treat as an ``enhanced factor'' in its case-by-case review any
proposed increase in below-1-GHz spectrum holdings resulting in the
acquiring entity holding approximately one-third or more of the
suitable and available spectrum below 1 GHz. Mobile Spectrum
Holdings Report and Order, 29 FCC Rcd at 6233, 6240, paras. 267,
286-88. In 2016, the Commission adopted a separate mmW spectrum
threshold that would apply to its case-by-case review of proposed
secondary market mmW transactions. Use of Spectrum Bands Above 24
GHz For Mobile Radio Services, et al., GN Docket No. 14-177, Report
and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 31 FCC Rcd
8014, 8081, 8083-84, paras. 184, 189 (2016) (Spectrum Frontiers 1st
R&O and FNPRM).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
58. Total Spectrum Screen. The Commission examines the suitability
and availability of spectrum to determine whether particular bands
should be included within the total spectrum screen.\153\ Suitability
is determined by whether the spectrum is capable of supporting mobile
service given its physical properties and the state of equipment
technology, whether the spectrum is licensed with a mobile allocation
and corresponding service rules, and whether the spectrum is committed
to another use that effectively precludes its use for mobile
services.\154\ Spectrum is considered ``available'' if it is ``fairly
certain that it will meet the criteria for suitable spectrum in the
near term, an assessment that can be made at the time the spectrum is
licensed or at later times after changes in technology or regulation
that affect the consideration.'' \155\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\153\ Mobile Spectrum Holdings Report and Order, 29 FCC Rcd at
6169-70, paras. 71-75.
\154\ Mobile Spectrum Holdings Report and Order, 29 FCC Rcd at
6169, para. 71.
\155\ Mobile Spectrum Holdings Report and Order, 29 FCC Rcd at
6169, para. 71 (internal quotation marks omitted).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
59. The Commission seeks comment on whether, for purposes of the
spectrum screen, the 12.7 GHz band will be ``suitable'' and
``available'' for the provision of mobile telephony/broadband services
shortly after the spectrum is assigned. To the extent the Commission
finds that the 12.7 GHz band is ``suitable and available,'' the
Commission seeks comment on whether it should include the band within
its total spectrum screen or within a separate spectrum screen, such as
the existing mmW threshold.\156\ To that end, the Commission seeks
comment on which bands are most similar in technical characteristics
with the 12.7 GHz band.\157\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\156\ See 2022 Communications Marketplace Report, FCC 22-103, at
66, para. 85 and Fig. II.B.9.
\157\ See, e.g., Use of Spectrum Bands Above 24 GHz For Mobile
Radio Services, et al., Third Report and Order, Memorandum Opinion
and Order, and Third Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 33 FCC Rcd 5576,
5612, para. 96 (2018); Facilitating Shared Use in the 3100-3550 MHz
Band, WT Docket 19-348, Second Report and Order, Order on
Reconsideration, and Order of Proposed Modification, 36 FCC Rcd
5987, 6022-23, para. 102 (2021) (3.45 GHz Second Report and Order);
Expanding Flexible Use of the 3.7 to 4.2 GHz Band, GN Docket No. 18-
122, Report and Order and Order of Proposed Modification, 35 FCC Rcd
2343, 2382-84, paras. 85-88 (2020) (3.7 GHz Order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
60. Initial licensing. Should there be a limit on the amount of
12.7 GHz band spectrum held by a single entity at the licensing stage?
If so, what should that limit be and why? Should the Commission
consider the factors set forth in the Mobile Spectrum Holdings Report
and Order \158\ in determining if a limit at the initial licensing
stage is appropriate? Should the Commission's determination also be
based on the extent to which competitors have opportunities to gain
access to alternative bands that would serve the same purpose as the
12.7 GHz band.\159\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\158\ Mobile Spectrum Holdings Report and Order, 29 FCC Rcd at
6192-93, paras. 143-44.
\159\ Mobile Spectrum Holdings Report and Order, 29 FCC Rcd at
6193, para. 144.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Technical Rules
1. Power Limits
61. The Commission establishes power limits for wireless services
to help limit the potential for harmful interference, among operators
using the same frequency bands (for example, in neighboring geographic
areas) as well as among operators using adjacent bands. The
determination of an appropriate power limit for a particular band is
informed by the technical characteristics of the band, as well as the
services expected to be deployed.\160\ Thus, Sec. 30.202 of the
Commission's rules restricts the power for fixed base stations
operating in connection with mobile systems to a maximum equivalent
isotropic radiated power (EIRP) density of +75 dBm/100 MHz.\161\ Under
Sec. 30.202, mobile stations and transportable stations are each
limited to a maximum EIRP of +43 dBm and +55 dBm, respectively.\162\
Since the adoption of these power limits, the Commission has seen mmW
wave deployments in various parts of the USA, chiefly in urban areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\160\ See, e.g., Spectrum Frontiers 1st R&O and FNPRM, 31 FCC
Rcd at 8110-12, paras. 276-80.
\161\ 47 CFR 30.202(a).
\162\ Id. Sec. 30.202(b), (c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
62. Setting appropriate power limits for the 12.7 GHz band requires
an
[[Page 43953]]
understanding of what services may be deployed in the band. It is
important that new technologies and feasible visions for future
wireless deployments are considered so that the appropriate power
limits are set to advance wireless innovation. Ericsson asserts that
the characteristics of the 12.7 GHz band make it a good fit for future
6G technologies and smart-city applications, and that use of the 12.7
GHz band would complement spectrum in the 3-8 GHz range.\163\ Qualcomm
states the 12.7 GHz Band is ideal for the deployment of the latest 6G
technological advances which will offer coverage levels only available
today in the lower mid-band spectrum range; these technologies, such as
Giga Multiple-Input Multiple-Output (MIMO), will overcome greater
signal losses in this upper range through higher beam directionality
and offer ubiquitous coverage, low latency, and high capacity.\164\
Qualcomm adds that increased data rates will support innovative use
cases like deeper immersion into digital and virtual worlds with
boundless augmented, virtual, extended and mixed reality (AR/VR/XR/MR)
applications and advanced sensing, which will allow for real-time
mapping of the physical world to a digital or virtual copy.\165\
Besides 6G operations, the Commission seeks comment on what other
feasible new services or technologies are envisioned to be deployed in
the band and whether they would require particular power level
profiles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\163\ Ericsson Comments at 3, 8.
\164\ Qualcomm Comments at 7.
\165\ Qualcomm Comments at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
63. Based on the record in response to the 12.7 NOI, and its
technical expertise, the Commission proposes to adopt the same power
limits that are applied to UMFUS operations.\166\ Specifically, for
base stations, mobile stations, and transportable stations, the
Commission proposes to adopt an EIRP limit of +75 dBm/100 MHz (or +72
dBm/50 MHz depending on the final channel size allocations), +43 dBm,
and +55 dBm, respectively. The Commission believes these limits to be
appropriate because, the Commission agrees with commenters that RF
characteristics in this band more closely resemble mmW transmissions
than lower mid-band transmissions.\167\ Furthermore, the Commission
agrees with commenters that higher frequencies are subject to greater
signal attenuation.\168\ Commenters from the terrestrial mobile
wireless industry have submitted general feedback urging the Commission
to establish power limits in a way that does not hinder development and
innovation in this band while providing sufficient coverage for the
public.\169\ The Commission seeks comment on its proposed power limits
for this band. If beams incorporating higher directionality are
employed in this band, the Commission seeks comment on including
provisions similar to Sec. 101.145(c) to protect GSO satellites,
particularly if the Commission grandfathers existing FSS operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\166\ See 47 CFR 30.202.
\167\ See, e.g., AT&T Comments at 1; Ericsson Comments at 8; T-
Mobile Comments at 14; Intelsat Reply at 11-12.
\168\ See CTIA Comments at 9-10 (arguing that the greater
propagation loss at 12.7 GHz as compared to that at low mid-band
spectrum will require even higher power levels to provide meaningful
coverage range and capacity); Ericsson Comments at 2, 10; Nokia
Comments at 2; Verizon Comments at 9 (``The Commission should also
promote standard-power deployments and further consider power levels
greater than those contained in part 27 of the Commission's rules to
compensate for the higher propagation losses in this frequency
range.''); CCA Reply at 1-2, (``[H]igh-powered use will provide the
greatest potential for innovation and will aid the wireless industry
in serving American consumers.''); CCA Reply at 5 (``For many CCA
members who serve suburban and rural areas, low-power operations may
be too costly because of the number of cell sites needed to provide
sufficient coverage.''); accord 5G Americas Reply at 7.
\169\ See, e.g., T-Mobile Reply at 9, 12; 5G Americas Reply at
7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
64. The Commission seeks comment on whether incumbent satellite
services and new terrestrial mobile services can coexist if the latter
will be subject to the power limits that the Commission proposes above.
Various satellite industry interests have expressed concerns that
satellite operations cannot successfully co-exist with mobile
terrestrial broadband networks in the 12.7 GHz band.\170\ Overall, they
identify two chief sources of interference: FSS uplink transmissions
can interfere with receiving terrestrial mobile stations, and aggregate
emissions of high power terrestrial mobile stations can also interfere
with the satellite antenna of an FSS system receiving in the band.\171\
As noted above, Verizon also questions how any incipient terrestrial
mobile services would coexist with a substantial number of new NGSO FSS
deployments in the band.\172\ CTIA asserts that coexistence is possible
between new entrants and incumbent FSS, because FSS space stations will
be protected based on the terrestrial service obligations contained in
Radio Regulations Table 21-1, which includes a maximum equivalent
isotropic radiated power (``EIRP'') of +45 dBW for a station in the
fixed or mobile service.\173\ The Commission agrees with CTIA that, as
long as terrestrial mobile broadband operations do not exceed the power
limits that the Commission proposes, they should pose no danger of
exceeding any aggregate interference level at any victim receivers on
satellites operating in the band, but the Commission seeks comment on
this observation. Furthermore, proposed grandfathered FSS earth
stations are not susceptible to harmful interference because they do
not receive in this band. Nevertheless, the Commission seeks comment on
whether satellite services and terrestrial mobile services can coexist
with power limits of Sec. 30.202. Is it appropriate to adopt these
power limits for the 12.7 GHz band for base station, mobile station,
and transportable stations? Would it be useful to limit the power
terrestrial transmitters may emit toward higher elevation angles to
protect satellite receivers from aggregate emissions?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\170\ See Eutelsat Comments at 4-5; Hispasat Comments at 6-8;
Intelsat/SES Comments at 12-14.
\171\ Hispasat Comments at 6.
\172\ Verizon Comments at 8 & n.26 (citing SpaceX Gen2 Order,
FCC 22-91 at para. 49 (authorizing the construction, deployment, and
authorization of up to 7,500 satellites in the 12.75-13.25 GHz band,
among other segments)); see supra note 77 and accompanying text.
\173\ EIRP power limits in ITU radio regulations Table 21-1 does
not specify a reference bandwidth, so this power limit is 45dBW
(75dBm) regardless of the reference bandwidth, i.e. any reference
bandwidth may be used for the power limit. Therefore, the Commission
maintains that its proposed limit of 75dBm/100MHz is at least as
conservative as the ITU radio regulations power limit. For example,
the ITU regulations would permit 75dBm/1MHz, which would be higher
power than what the Commission proposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
65. The Commission also received comment urging the Commission to
conduct further technical studies before establishing power limits for
12.7 GHz band.\174\ Nokia recommends a detailed analysis regarding the
EIRP limit for flexible use in the 12.7 GHz band.\175\ It states that
such an analysis should consider ``(1) the impact of relocating some
incumbent services from the 12.7 GHz band, and a potential relaxation
of maximum EIRP requirements, (2) the coexistence scenarios involving
incumbent services in the 12.7 GHz band and in the lower and upper
adjacent bands, and (3) receiver characteristics of incumbent users,
including out-of-band receiver blocking performance.'' \176\ Are there
other comprehensive technical studies that could shed light on the
appropriate power levels for this band? What are the technical reasons
that it is appropriate or not appropriate to adopt the part 30
[[Page 43954]]
power limits? Are there alternative power limit proposals that would
serve the public interest better and what are the technical data and
analysis for these reasons? Are there alternative metrics for
controlling power in this band? The Commission further seeks comment on
any additional considerations that should be included to provide
adequate protection for services in the adjacent bands. For any
alternative or additional proposals, metrics, or considerations,
commenters should include technical details, including any and/or all
assumptions and parameters. For example, how would the in-band
requirements specified in various ITU documents, discussed above,
translate to out-of-band requirements in the 12.7 GHz? Is any further
information or assumptions necessary, particularly concerning out-of-
band receiver blocking performance for receivers in the adjacent bands?
Commenters advocating for particular technical rules to protect
operations in adjacent bands, including DBS, NGSO FSS, MVDDS, active
spaceborne sensors, and ARNS, should provide detailed information on
the receiver, antenna, and operational characteristics for such
services operating in the adjacent bands.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\174\ Hispasat Comments at 13-14; Nokia Comments at 6.s
\175\ Nokia Comments at 7-8.
\176\ Nokia Comments at 7-8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Out-of-Band Emissions (OOBE) Limits
66. The Commission seeks comment on appropriate out-of-band
emissions (OOBE) limits for base and mobile stations in the 12.7 GHz
band. Section 101.111(a)(2)(i) of the Commission's rules establishes an
emission limit for fixed stations operating with digital emissions in
this band expressed as A = 35 + 0.8(P -50) + 10 Log10 B, where A is
attenuation below the mean output power of the transmitter, B is the
authorized bandwidth in megahertz, and P is the percentage by which the
transmitter bandwidth is removed from the carrier frequency.\177\ Under
this provision, attenuation greater than 80 decibels or to an absolute
power of less than -13 dBm/1MHz is not required.\178\ This emission
limit is defined in conducted fashion.\179\ These rules are intended to
support various fixed microwave technologies with conventional antenna
systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\177\ 47 CFR 101.111(a)(2)(i).
\178\ Id.
\179\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
67. For most mobile systems, the Commission has generally required
licensees to attenuate their unwanted emission power below the
transmission mean power (P) by a factor of at least 43 + 10log10(P), or
-13dBm/MHz for any emissions on frequencies outside the licensee's
authorized spectrum.\180\ These requirements take effect at the edges
of the assigned frequencies (e.g., channel, block, or band), and may be
used as a basis for developing further requirements that relate to
transmitter performance by industry standard organizations.\181\ This
limit is applied equally both to base stations and to mobile stations,
and compliance with this limit in existing systems, where access to the
RF port of the antennas is conveniently available, is based on
conducted measurement of transmission power at the output of the
individual RF port.\182\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\180\ See, e.g., 47 CFR 22.359(a), 47 CFR 27.53(a)(1)(i).
\181\ Id.
\182\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
68. In response to the 12.7 NOI, a few commenters suggest specific
criteria for out-of-band emission limits. For example, 5G Americas and
CTIA suggest that new broadband users should be subject to the same
out-of-band emission limits that apply to the existing incumbents in
the band.\183\ T-Mobile and Ericsson suggest that the Commission
consider adopting the same out-of-band emission limit of -13 dBm/MHz
that was adopted in the Spectrum Frontiers proceedings for the Upper
Microwave Flexible Use Service in the upper mmW spectrum bands.\184\ T-
Mobile argues that this existing out-of-band emission limit is
sufficient to protect services in adjacent bands.\185\ Hispasat,
Oneweb, Dish, and SpaceX suggest that further analysis should be
conducted to determine whether the existing out-of-band emissions limit
is, in fact, sufficient to protect users in adjacent bands.\186\ Due to
the propagation characteristics in the 12.7 GHz band signal attenuation
with distance is higher than at lower frequencies and to overcome those
losses higher gain antennas are typically used, therefore the
Commission believes that deployments in this band are likely to use
integrated multiple element antenna arrays that have characteristics
more similar to antennas in the UMFUS bands than those in the PCS and
AWS bands. As such, measurement of OOBE based on conducted measurements
may be challenging, as was recognized to be the case for the mmW
bands.\187\ In order to achieve higher antenna gain in the compact
format necessary for mobile operation and beam steering necessary for
base stations to track mobile devices, the Commission expects that
mobile and base stations in the 12.7 GHz band, much like the mmW bands,
will have tens of radiating elements with multiple power amplifiers.
Recognizing the potential measurement challenges posed by having a
requirement based on conducted measurements, the Commission proposes to
provide flexibility for the out-of-band emission limits to be measured
either using conducted power or radiated power, and the Commission
seeks comment on this proposal. With lack of RF ports, the emission
measurement needs to be made in radiated fashion, and the antenna gain
must be characterized and subtracted from the radiated measurement if
the emission limit is to be defined in conducted fashion. Ericsson
suggests that in order to support adaptive antennas, either the
conductive power or the total radiated power of any emission outside a
licensee's frequency block shall be -13 dBm/MHz or lower.\188\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\183\ See CTIA Comments at 13; 5G Americas Comments at 2.
\184\ See Ericsson Comments at 11; T-Mobile Comments at 14 &
n.47 (citing 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, para. 34 (2017); Use of Spectrum Bands
Above 24 GHz For Mobile Radio Services, Fourth Report and Order, 33
FCC Rcd 12168, paras. 11-12 (2018)).
\185\ See T-Mobile Reply at 10.
\186\ See OneWeb Comments at 4; DISH Reply at 7; Hispasat Reply
at 13; SpaceX Reply at 6.
\187\ Spectrum Frontiers 1st R&O and FNPRM, 31 FCC Rcd at 8117,
para. 297 (discussing OOBE measurement challenges in the mmW band).
\188\ See Ericsson Comments at 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
69. In light of the discussion above, the Commission proposes to
adopt a requirement that the conductive power or the total radiated
power of any emission outside a licensee's frequency block shall be -13
dBm/MHz or lower and seeks comment on this proposal. The Commission
seeks comment on whether a radiated emission limit of -13 dBm/MHz can
be supported by transmitters operating in the 12.7 GHz band. In this
NPRM, the Commission also proposes to retain a portion of the band
either at the top or bottom edge of the band, or both, to accommodate
re-packed mobile TV pickup operations. From the perspective of
protecting services in adjacent bands from out-of-band emissions and
harmful interference, does one of these alternatives offer more
benefits than the others? Should the out-of-band emissions limits be
different if mobile services are adjacent to incumbent TV pickup
operations, as opposed to being directly adjacent to the 12.7 GHz or
13.25 GHz band edges? Should the out-of-band emissions limits be
applied at the band edge between new flexible use services and BAS, or
is it necessary to define out-of-band emissions limits at
[[Page 43955]]
the edges of the 12.7 and 13.25 GHz band, regardless of any buffer
created by BAS repack bands?
70. The Commission notes that out-of-band emissions and spurious
emissions characterize the overall emission performance of a
transmitter, and that the measurement procedures for spurious emissions
at antenna terminals and the field strength of spurious radiation are
described in the Commission's rules. For bands higher than 1 GHz, for
example PCS and AWS-1, compliance with the emission rule is based on a
resolution bandwidth of 1 megahertz or greater, except within the first
1 megahertz.\189\ In the first 1 megahertz bands immediately outside
and adjacent to the channel block, a resolution bandwidth equal to at
least 1 percent of the emission bandwidth of the fundamental emission
of the transmitter may be employed, provided that the measured power is
integrated over the full required measurement bandwidth.\190\ The
Commission seeks comment on whether the Commission should apply this
measurement methodology in this band; and if so, whether the 1 MHz
resolution bandwidth is appropriate. Alternatively, what resolution and
frequency offset should be considered to define out-of-band emissions
and spurious emissions?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\189\ See, e.g., 47 CFR 27.53(a)(5).
\190\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
71. The Commission request that commenters proposing specific out-
of-band emissions criteria or alternative methods of defining or
measuring the out-of-band emissions provide technical analysis
describing how the proposed radiated emission limits would mitigate the
risk of harmful interference to operations by adjacent users. The
Commission also seeks comment on protection of Federal operations in
adjacent bands in section I.E.7 below (Protection of Federal
Operations).
3. Field Strength Limits/Market Boundaries
72. The Commission's rules for mobile services typically define
field strength limits at the market boundaries in order to prevent
interference or facilitate coordination between licensees in adjacent
markets. For example, the part 27 rules for the Advanced Wireless
Services (AWS) specify that the predicted or measured median field
strength at any location on the geographical border of a licensee's
service area shall not exceed 47 dB[micro]V/m unless the adjacent
affected service area licensee(s) agree(s) to a different field
strength.\191\ The part 30 rules for Upper Microwave Flexible Use
Service (UMFUS) specify that the predicted or measured Power Flux
Density (PFD) from any Base Station operating in the 27.5-28.35 GHz
band, 37-38.6 GHz band, and 38.6-40 GHz bands at any location on the
geographical border of a licensee's service area shall not exceed -77.6
dBm/m2/MHz (measured at 1.5 meters above ground) unless the adjacent
affected service area licensee(s) agree(s) to a different PFD.\192\ The
part 101 rules for the Multipoint Video and Data Distribution Service
(MVDDS) in the 12.2-12.7 GHz band, directly adjacent to the band under
consideration here, simply specify that licensees must coordinate their
operations whenever the facilities have optical line-of-sight into
other licensees' areas or are within the same geographic area.\193\
While none of the commenters in response to the 12.7 NOI suggested
specific criteria for field strength limits at the market boundaries,
several commenters do support an exclusive market-based licensing
framework.\194\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\191\ See 47 CFR 27.55(a)(1).
\192\ See 47 CFR 30.204(a).
\193\ See 47 CFR 101.1421(c).
\194\ See CCA Reply at 4; AT&T Comments at 4; CTIA Comments at
2, 6; Ericsson Comments at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
73. In section I.D above (Licensing and Operating Rules) of this
NPRM, the Commission proposes to establish a framework for licensing
this band using exclusive market based licenses with 100 or 50
megahertz channel blocks. Since the Commission proposes to license
geographic areas on an exclusive basis the Commission also proposes to
establish PFD limits at the market boundaries, consistent with the
approach the Commission has used in the past for similar market-based
services. The Commission believes that some criteria are necessary at
market boundaries to manage interference and coordination between
adjacent area licensees. The Commission also believes that given the
wide channel bandwidths and diversity of potential applications that
might be deployed in these bands, any criteria that the Commission
proposes should include a scaling factor for the bandwidth. In the
Spectrum Frontiers proceeding the Commission adopted a PFD of -77.6
dBm/m2/MHz (measured at 1.5 meters above ground).\195\ The Commission
believes that deployments in this band are likely to use directional
antennas that have characteristics more similar to those in the UMFUS
bands than those in the PCS and AWS bands. Therefore, the Commission
proposes to adopt a requirement that the predicted or measured Power
Flux Density (PFD) from any Base Station operating in the 12.7 GHz band
at any location on the geographical border of a licensee's service area
shall not exceed -77.6 dBm/m2/MHz (measured at 1.5 meters above ground)
unless the adjacent affected service area licensee(s) agree(s) to a
different PFD. The Commission seeks comment on this proposal. The
Commission seeks comment on whether a PFD at the market boundary is the
appropriate metric for this band or whether there are advantages to
using a different metric, such as a field strength limit, which is used
for other mobile services under part 27? Is the specific PFD value the
Commission proposes appropriate for this frequency band taking into
consideration factors like the typical receive antenna gain and
receiver characteristics? Would simple coordination criteria, such as
those currently in place for the MVDDS services in the 12.2-12.7 GHz
band, which require coordination for any facility that has optical line
of sight to an adjacent market be more appropriate? Given the potential
flexible uses of the band, would it be appropriate to have different
interference protection and/or coordination criteria depending on the
types of services (e.g., fixed or mobile) that a licensee deploys?
Commenters who propose alternative metrics or criteria or for
controlling interference or facilitating coordination between licensees
in adjacent markets or adjacent channels within the same market should
describe their proposal in detail and support their proposal with
engineering analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\195\ See Spectrum Frontiers 1st R&O and FNPRM, 31 FCC Rcd at
8124, para. 312. The Commission notes that the final rule adopted by
the Spectrum Frontiers 1st R&O and FNPRM listed the incorrect value
of -76 dBm/m2/MHz as opposed to the -77.6 dBm/m2/MHz value
referenced in the discussion of the item. For clarity, in the
instant 12.7 GHz NPRM, the Commission is proposing the -77.6 dBm/m2/
MHz value.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Antenna Height Limits
74. The Commission proposes not to adopt limits on base station
antenna height at this time because no commenters address the issue in
response to the 12.7 NOI. The Commission seeks comment on this
proposal. Considering what future wireless networks are envisioned to
be, are antenna height thresholds and corresponding power reductions
applicable to certain part 27 bands \196\ appropriate for base or fixed
stations that will be used in the 12.7 GHz band to provide mobile
broadband or for other expanded uses? Conversely, given
[[Page 43956]]
that the Commission is proposing below to control interference at
license boundaries, are separate antenna height restrictions and
corresponding power reductions even necessary? The Commission
tentatively proposes not to adopt antenna height and power limits
similar to those in its part 27 rules for certain bands. However, the
Commission seeks comment on whether power limits based on antenna
height are necessary and/or whether any modifications should be made to
either the height thresholds or the power limits at specific heights
that the Commission has proposed. The Commission also seeks comment on
whether there would there be any benefit in requiring antenna downtilt
for antennas above a certain height? The Commission seeks comment on
this proposal, including the costs and benefits of the proposal and any
alternatives. For alternative proposals, commenters should provide
technical support.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\196\ See, e.g., 47 CFR 27.50(b)(1)-(5), (c)(1)-(4) (power and
antenna height limits set forth in Tables 1-4 of Sec. 27.50
applicable to certain 600 MHz, 700 MHz, and 800 MHz bands), (c)(1)-
(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Canada and Mexico Coordination
75. Typically, the Commission's rules provide that fixed and mobile
operations are subject to international agreements with Mexico and
Canada.\197\ The Commission proposes to apply the same limitation to
the newly established rules for the 12.7-13.25 GHz band. Until such
time as any adjusted agreements between the United States, Mexico, and/
or Canada can be agreed to, operations in the 12.7-13.25 GHz band must
not cause harmful interference across any international borders of the
United States, consistent with the terms of the agreements currently in
force.\198\ Currently, fixed use of the 12.7-13.25 GHz band is covered
by an existing arrangement between the United States and Canada.\199\
The Commission notes that further modification of the proposed rules
might be necessary in order to comply with any future agreements with
Canada and Mexico regarding the use of this band. The Commission seeks
comment on this issue, including the costs and benefits of
alternatives.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\197\ See e.g., 47 CFR 27.57, 30.206, 101.147(r)(13),
101.509(d).
\198\ See Agreement Concerning the Coordination and Use of Radio
Frequencies Above Thirty Megacycles per Second, Ca.-U.S., Oct 24,
1962 13 UST 2418, https://transition.fcc.gov/ib/sand/agree/files/can-nb/above30.pdf.
\199\ See Agreement Concerning the Coordination and Use of Radio
Frequencies Above Thirty Megacycles per Second, Ca.-U.S., Oct 24,
1962 13 UST 2418, https://transition.fcc.gov/ib/sand/agree/files/can-nb/above30.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. General Part 27 Rules
76. There are several additional technical rules applicable to all
part 27 services, including Sec. Sec. 27.51 (equipment authorization),
27.52 (RF safety), 27.54 (frequency stability), 27.56 (antennas
structures; air navigation safety), and 27.63 (disturbance of AM
broadcast station antenna patterns).\200\ Given that the Commission
proposes to designate mobile broadband and other expanded uses of the
12.7 GHz band as part 27 services, the Commission proposes to apply
these general part 27 rules to all 12.7 GHz band licenses. Further, the
Commission proposes to apply these rules to licensees that acquire
their licenses through partitioning or disaggregation (to the extent
the service rules permit such aggregation). The Commission seeks
comment on its proposals, including specific costs and benefits, and
ask commenters to identify any aspects of its general part 27 rules
that should be modified to accommodate the particular characteristics
of the 12.7 GHz band.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\200\ See, e.g., 47 CFR 27.51, 27.52, 27.54, 27.56, 27.63.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. Protection of Federal Operations
a. In-Band
77. Federal operations in the 12.7-13.25 GHz band include the Space
Research Service (SRS) (space-to-Earth) and the use of commercial
satellites in the FSS (Earth-to-space). The National Telecommunications
and Information Administration (NTIA) filed comment in response to the
12.7 NOI raising concerns about interference to SRS operations at
Goldstone, CA ground stations and other Federal systems.\201\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\201\ See NTIA Comments at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
78. With respect to Goldstone, NTIA has expressed concern that
ground stations maybe susceptible to interference from commercial
network base stations and handheld mobile stations.\202\ Per footnote
US251 of the Table of Allocation, the 12.75-13.25 GHz band is also
allocated to the space research (deep space) (space-to-Earth) service
for reception only at Goldstone, CA (35[deg] 20' N, 116[deg] 53'
W).\203\ Goldstone is one of three ground station complexes around the
world known as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(NASA)'s Deep Space Network (DSN) established for commanding, tracking
and monitoring the health and safety of spacecraft at many distant
planetary locales. The DSN is also used to conduct powerful science
investigations that examine the nature of asteroids and the interiors
of planets and moons.\204\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\202\ NTIA Comments at 2.
\203\ See supra note 11 and accompanying text.
\204\ For details, see 12.7 NOI at *3, para. 6 and NASA, What is
the Deep Space Network (Mar. 30, 2020) (NASA's Deep Space Network
``is the largest and most sensitive scientific telecommunications
system in the world.''), https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/heo/scan/services/networks/deep_space_network/about.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
79. Additionally, NTIA raised concerns about possible aggregate
interference from a large population of terrestrial emitters to current
and future commercial satellite receivers used by the DoD.\205\ In
light of this, NTIA suggested that the Commission consider a
compatibility analysis between mobile broadband service and commercial
GSO and NGSO satellites.\206\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\205\ NTIA Comments at 2.
\206\ NTIA Comments at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
80. NTIA also raised concerns about possible interference to NASA
and NSF passive radio astronomy observatories operating in the 12.7 GHz
band.\207\ The sites at issue include very long baseline interferometry
(VLBI) stations for geodesy and astrometry high accuracy reference
frames.\208\ In its comments, NTIA notes that current coordination
requirements exist for Green Bank Telescope within the National Radio
Quiet Zone (NRQZ) for ground-based transmitters and that repurposing
the 12.7 GHz band to allow terrestrial mobile broadband or other
expanded use may require additional coordination zones and/or new
coordination agreements and updated NRQZ coordination requirements with
the changes beneficial for other U.S. radio astronomy
observatories.\209\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\207\ NTIA Comments at 2.
\208\ NTIA Comments at 2.
\209\ NTIA Comments at 2-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
81. Recognizing the importance of these Federal operations in the
band, and the need to protect them from interference, the Commission
seeks comment on establishing coordination zone and/or other criteria
to protect Goldstone ground stations from possible harmful interference
that might be caused by mobile broadband or other expanded use intended
for the 12.7-13.25 GHz band. The Commission seeks comment on how to
define such a coordination zone and on what interference protection
levels should apply at the edge of the coordination zone. The
Commission notes that to protect Goldstone site, Sec. 30.205 of the
Commission's rules defines two coordination zones with contours
`coordinates tables corresponding to 60 dBm/100 MHz EIRP and 75 dBm/100
MHz EIRP respectively. Under Sec. 30.205, all licensees in the 37-38
GHz band located in the coordination zone must
[[Page 43957]]
coordinate with Federal Space Research Service (space to Earth) users
of the band via the NTIA. All licensees within the zone defined by the
60 dBm/100 MHz EIRP must coordinate all operations; licensees operating
within the area between the zones defined by the 60 dBm/100 MHz and 75
dBm/100 MHz EIRP must coordinate all operations if their base station
EIRP is greater than 60 dBm/100 MHz or if their antenna height exceeds
100 meters above ground level; licensees operating outside the zones
defined by the 75 dBm/100 MHz EIRP coordinates are not required to
coordinate their operations with NTIA. Could a similar approach, based
on a coordination agreement with NASA, be adopted for mobile broadband
to ensure protection of the DSN?
b. Adjacent Band
82. Federal operations adjacent to the 12.7-13.25 GHz band include
both military and scientific operations in the upper adjacent-band,
13.25-13.75 GHz. This band can be divided into two sub bands, the
13.25-13.4 GHz band and the 13.4-13.75 GHz band, each with different
Federal allocations. The 13.25-13.4 GHz portion is allocated on a
secondary basis for Federal Earth exploration satellite services (EESS)
(active), space research services (SRS) (active), and on a primary
basis for aeronautical radionavigation services (ARNS).\210\ The 13.25-
13.4 GHz portion is allocated for Federal EESS (active), SRS (active),
and radiolocation services on a primary basis and standard frequency
and time signal-satellite (Earth-to-space) on a secondary basis.\211\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\210\ NTIA Comments at 3.
\211\ NTIA Comments at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
83. In response to the 12.7 NOI, NTIA articulated several concerns
related to adjacent band Federal operations.\212\ First, NTIA noted
that the 13.25-13.4 GHz band is used by the Department of Defense (DoD)
and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to operate airborne
Doppler navigation radar systems used to determine ground speed and
drift angle of an aircraft with respect to the ground.\213\ NTIA
believes those operations may be susceptible to performance degradation
due to interference coming from 12.7-13.25 GHz.\214\ Future Unmanned
aircraft detect-and-avoid safety systems being developed in this band
are also a source of concern for the NTIA.\215\ Although Recommendation
ITU-R M.2008-1 provides characteristics and protection criteria for the
13.25-13.4 GHz band used for airborne Doppler radars,\216\ NTIA
believes that adjacent-band compatibility studies with representative
commercial deployments may be necessary to update Recommendation ITU-R
M.2008-1 to reflect the characteristics of current and future airborne
Doppler navigation radars.\217\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\212\ NTIA Comments at 3-5.
\213\ NTIA Comments at 4.
\214\ NTIA Comments at 4.
\215\ NTIA Comments at 4.
\216\ NTIA Comments at 4.
\217\ NTIA Comments at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
84. NTIA also noted that the 13.4-13.75 GHz band is used for DoD
operations of shipborne radars (search radars, tracking radars, and
missile and gun fire-control radars), the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) satellite operations in the Joint
Satellite Oceanography Network (JASON), NASA's active remote sensing
(including the future Surface Water and Ocean Topography (SWOT)
mission), Global Precipitation Mission (GPM) and Tracking and Data
Relay Satellite (TDRS) operations, and the NSF continuum and spectral-
line research (including as a calibration aid for the radionavigation
satellite service) operations.\218\ NTIA is concerned that aggregate
interference from mobile base stations and ubiquitous handheld units
may cause interference to NASA and NOAA's satellite systems.\219\
Mobile broadband operations are also believed to be possible source of
interference to military agencies radar systems.\220\ NTIA suggests
that adjacent-band compatibility studies with representative commercial
deployments are necessary to assess any possible degradation of Federal
operations in the 13.4-13.75 GHz band.\221\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\218\ NTIA Comments at 5.
\219\ NTIA Comments at 5.
\220\ NTIA comments at 5.
\221\ NTIA Comments at 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
85. The Commission notes that NTIA has set up a Technical
Interchange Group (TIG) as a tool for implementation of electromagnetic
Compatibility (EMC) studies between 12.7-13.25 GHz band mobile
broadband or other expanded use and Federal systems.\222\ NTIA TIG
recommendations can be submitted in the record for the NPRM to help
inform the decisions in the Report and Order (R&O). In section I.E.2
above (Out-of-Band Emissions (OOBE) Limits), the Commission proposes to
establish an out-of-band emissions limit of -13dBm/1MHz anywhere
outside a licensee spectrum block and seeks comment on that proposal.
In this section, the Commission seeks comment on whether that same out-
of-band emission limit is adequate to protect Federal operations in the
adjacent bands. If the Commission relocates mobile BAS/CARS operations
into a portion of the 12.7-13.25 GHz band, could creating a buffer
between base/mobile operations and Federal operations alleviate some of
the Federal concerns about interference? Recognizing the importance of
Federal operations in adjacent bands, the Commission seeks comment
generally on how to protect Federal operations in bands adjacent to the
12.7-13.25 GHz band.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\222\ NTIA Comments at 5-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
F. Promoting Digital Equity and Inclusion
86. The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to advance
digital equity for all,\223\ 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 \224\ and benefits (if any) that may be
associated with the proposals and issues discussed herein.
Specifically, the Commission seeks comment on how its proposals may
promote or inhibit advances in diversity, equity, inclusion, and
accessibility, as well the scope of the Commission's relevant legal
authority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\223\ Section 1 of the Communications Act of 1934 as amended
provides that the FCC ``regulat[es] interstate and foreign commerce
in communication by wire and radio so as to make [such service]
available, so far as possible, to all the people of the United
States, without discrimination on the basis of race, color,
religion, national origin, or sex.'' 47 U.S.C. 151.
\224\ The term ``equity'' is used here consistent with Executive
Order 13985 as the consistent and systematic fair, just, and
impartial treatment of all individuals, including individuals who
belong to underserved communities that have been denied such
treatment, such as Black, Latino, and Indigenous and Native American
persons, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders and other persons of
color; members of religious minorities; lesbian, gay, bisexual,
transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) persons; persons with disabilities;
persons who live in rural areas; and persons otherwise adversely
affected by persistent poverty or inequality. See E.O. 13985, 86 FR
7009, Executive Order on Advancing Racial Equity and Support for
Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government (Jan. 20,
2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis In GN Docket No. 22-352
87. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as
amended (RFA),\225\ the Commission has prepared
[[Page 43958]]
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 on the NPRM. The Commission will send a copy of
the NPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration (SBA).\226\ In addition, the NPRM and
IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be published in the Federal
Register.\227\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\225\ See 5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. 601-612, has been
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996 (SBREFA), Public Law 104-121, Title II, 110 Stat. 857 (1996).
\226\ 5 U.S.C. 603(a).
\227\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules
88. The NPRM seeks comment on proposals to repurpose some or all of
the 550 megahertz of upper mid-band spectrum between 12.7-13.25 GHz
(12.7 GHz band) for mobile broadband or other expanded use. The
Commission is pursuing the joint goals of making this spectrum
available for new wireless uses while effectively accommodating
incumbent operations in the band. Accordingly, the NPRM seeks comment
on various proposals for transitioning all or part of the band to make
it available for mobile broadband, as well as other expanded uses that
will help ensure that the speed, capacity, and ubiquity of the nation's
wireless networks so that they may keep pace with the demands placed
upon them by new technologies and possible new types of services for
consumers and businesses.
89. The NPRM proposes to require new licensees to protect fixed
point-to-point incumbents until a sunset date with the option to
negotiate agreements for accelerated relocations to other bands or
media, and to repack mobile Broadcast Auxiliary Service (BAS) and Cable
Television Relay Services (CARS) incumbents within a portion(s) of the
band designated for such use. The Commission also proposes to
grandfather the 23 Fixed Satellite Service (FSS) earth stations
currently authorized to operate in the band (Earth-to-space) in
accordance with the U.S. Table of Allocations, but otherwise prohibit
all future earth stations of this type. Other earth station operations
in the band could continue to operate on a non-interference,
unprotected basis. Furthermore, the Commission proposes to dismiss any
new space station license applications and new requests for access to
the U.S. market through non-U.S.-licensed space stations, or those
parts of any such applications and requests, that seek to operate in
the 12.7 GHz band. Under these proposals, the band would be unavailable
for new Fixed Service (FS), mobile BAS, or FSS earth stations and would
become available for mobile broadband and other expanded uses. The NPRM
encourages commenters to discuss and quantify the costs and benefits
associated with any of the proposed approaches for transitioning the
band, along with other helpful technical or procedural details. These
actions are another step in the Commission's efforts to close the
digital divide by providing wireless broadband connectivity across the
nation and to secure U.S. leadership in the next generation of wireless
services, including fifth-generation (5G) wireless, 6G, and beyond.
A. Legal Basis
90. The proposed action is taken pursuant to sections 1, 2, 4, 5,
301, 302, 303, 304, 307, 309, 310, and 316 of the Communications Act of
1934, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154, 155, 301, 302a, 303, 304, 307, 309, 310,
316, and Sec. 1.411 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.411.
B. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which
the Proposed Rules Will Apply
91. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where
feasible, an estimate of, the number of small entities that may be
affected by the rules, if adopted.\228\ The RFA generally defines the
term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms ``small
business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental
jurisdiction.'' \229\ In addition, the term ``small business'' has the
same meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small
Business Act.\230\ 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.\231\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\228\ Id. section 603(b)(3).
\229\ Id. section 601(6).
\230\ Id. section 601(3) (incorporating the definition of
``small business concern'' in in the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C.
632). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 601(3), the statutory definition of a
small business applies ``unless an agency, after consultation with
the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration and
after opportunity for public comment, establishes one or more
definitions of such term which are appropriate to the activities of
the agency and publishes such definition(s) in the Federal
Register.''
\231\ 15 U.S.C. 632.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
92. 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, at the outset, three broad groups of small entities
that could be directly affected herein.\232\ First, while there are
industry specific size standards for small businesses that are used in
the regulatory flexibility analysis, according to data from the Small
Business Administration's (SBA) Office of Advocacy, in general a small
business is an independent business having fewer than 500
employees.\233\ These types of small businesses represent 99.9% of all
businesses in the United States, which translates to 32.5 million
businesses.\234\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\232\ 5 U.S.C. 601(3)-(6).
\233\ See SBA, Office of Advocacy, Frequently Asked Questions,
``What is a small business?,'' https://cdn.advocacy.sba.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/03093005/Small-Business-FAQ-2021.pdf. Nov
2021.
\234\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
93. 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.''
\235\ 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.\236\ 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.\237\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\235\ 5 U.S.C. 601(4).
\236\ The IRS benchmark is similar to the population of less
than 50,000 benchmark in 5 U.S.C 601(5) that is used to define a
small governmental jurisdiction. Therefore, the IRS benchmark has
been used to estimate the number of small organizations in this
small entity description. See Annual Electronic Filing Requirement
for Small Exempt Organizations--Form 990-N (e-Postcard), ``Who must
file,'' https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/annual-electronic-filing-requirement-for-small-exempt-organizations-form-990-n-e-postcard. The Commission note that the IRS data does not provide
information on whether a small exempt organization is independently
owned and operated or dominant in its field.
\237\ See Exempt Organizations Business Master File Extract
(E.O. BMF), ``CSV Files by Region,'' https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/exempt-organizations-business-master-file-extract-eo-bmf. The IRS Exempt Organization Business Master File (E.O. BMF)
Extract provides information on all registered tax-exempt/non-profit
organizations. The data utilized for purposes of this description
was extracted from the IRS E.O. BMF data for businesses for the tax
year 2020 with revenue less than or equal to $50,000 for Region 1-
Northeast Area (58,577), Region 2-Mid-Atlantic and Great Lakes Areas
(175,272), and Region 3-Gulf Coast and Pacific Coast Areas (213,840)
that includes the continental U.S., Alaska, and Hawaii. This data
does not include information for Puerto Rico.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 43959]]
94. 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.'' \238\ U.S.
Census Bureau data from the 2017 Census of Governments \239\ indicate
there were 90,075 local governmental jurisdictions consisting of
general purpose governments and special purpose governments in the
United States.\240\ Of this number, there were 36,931 general purpose
governments (county,\241\ municipal, and town or township \242\) with
populations of less than 50,000 and 12,040 special purpose
governments--independent school districts \243\ with enrollment
populations of less than 50,000.\244\ Accordingly, based on the 2017
U.S. Census of Governments data, the Commission estimates that at least
48,971 entities fall into the category of ``small governmental
jurisdictions.'' \245\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\238\ 5 U.S.C. 601(5).
\239\ See 13 U.S.C. 161. The Census of Governments survey is
conducted every five (5) years compiling data for years ending with
``2'' and ``7''. See also Census of Governments, https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/cog/about.html.
\240\ See U.S. Census Bureau, 2017 Census of Governments--
Organization Table 2. Local Governments by Type and State: 2017
[CG1700ORG02], https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2017/econ/gus/2017-governments.html. Local governmental jurisdictions are made up
of general purpose governments (county, municipal and town or
township) and special purpose governments (special districts and
independent school districts). See also tbl.2. CG1700ORG02 Table
Notes_Local Governments by Type and State_2017.
\241\ See id. at tbl.5. County Governments by Population-Size
Group and State: 2017 [CG1700ORG05], https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2017/econ/gus/2017-governments.html. There were 2,105 county
governments with populations less than 50,000. This category does
not include subcounty (municipal and township) governments.
\242\ See id. at tbl.6. Subcounty General-Purpose Governments by
Population-Size Group and State: 2017 [CG1700ORG06], https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2017/econ/gus/2017-governments.html.
There were 18,729 municipal and 16,097 town and township governments
with populations less than 50,000.
\243\ See id. at tbl.10. Elementary and Secondary School Systems
by Enrollment-Size Group and State: 2017 [CG1700ORG10], https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2017/econ/gus/2017-governments.html.
There were 12,040 independent school districts with enrollment
populations less than 50,000. See also tbl.4. Special-Purpose Local
Governments by State Census Years 1942 to 2017 [CG1700ORG04],
CG1700ORG04 Table Notes_Special Purpose Local Governments by
State_Census Years 1942 to 2017.
\244\ While the special purpose governments category also
includes local special district governments, the 2017 Census of
Governments data does not provide data aggregated based on
population size for the special purpose governments category.
Therefore, only data from independent school districts is included
in the special purpose governments category.
\245\ This total is derived from the sum of the number of
general purpose governments (county, municipal and town or township)
with populations of less than 50,000 (36,931) and the number of
special purpose governments--independent school districts with
enrollment populations of less than 50,000 (12,040), from the 2017
Census of Governments--Organizations tbls.5, 6 & 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
95. Radio Frequency Equipment Manufacturers (RF Manufacturers).
There are several analogous industries with an SBA small business size
standard that are applicable to RF Manufacturers. These industries are
Fixed Microwave Services, Other Communications Equipment Manufacturing,
Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment
Manufacturing. A description of these industries and the SBA small
business size standards are detailed below.
96. Fixed Microwave Services. Fixed microwave services include
common carrier,\246\ private-operational fixed,\247\ and broadcast
auxiliary radio services.\248\ They also include the Upper Microwave
Flexible Use Service (UMFUS),\249\ Millimeter Wave Service (70/80/90
GHz),\250\ Local Multipoint Distribution Service (LMDS),\251\ the
Digital Electronic Message Service (DEMS),\252\ 24 GHz Service,\253\
Multiple Address Systems (MAS),\254\ and Multichannel Video
Distribution and Data Service (MVDDS),\255\ where in some bands
licensees can choose between common carrier and non-common carrier
status.\256\ Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite)
\257\ is the closest industry with an SBA small business size standard
applicable to these services. The SBA small size standard for this
industry classifies a business as small if it has 1,500 or fewer
employees.\258\ U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that there were
2,893 firms that operated in this industry for the entire year.\259\ Of
this number, 2,837 firms employed fewer than 250 employees.\260\ Thus,
under the SBA size standard, the Commission estimates that a majority
of fixed microwave service licensees can be considered small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\246\ See 47 CFR part 101, subparts C and I.
\247\ See id. subparts C and H.
\248\ Auxiliary Microwave Service is governed by part 74 of
title 47 of the Commission's Rules. See 47 CFR part 74. Available to
licensees of broadcast stations and to broadcast and cable network
entities, broadcast auxiliary microwave stations are used for
relaying broadcast television signals from the studio to the
transmitter, or between two points such as a main studio and an
auxiliary studio. The service also includes mobile TV pickups, which
relay signals from a remote location back to the studio.
\249\ See 47 CFR part 30.
\250\ See 47 CFR part 101, subpart Q.
\251\ See id. subpart L.
\252\ See id. subpart G.
\253\ See id.
\254\ See id. subpart O.
\255\ See id. subpart P.
\256\ See 47 CFR 101.533, 101.1017.
\257\ See U.S. Census Bureau, 2017 NAICS Definition, ``517312
Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite),'' https://www.census.gov/naics/?input=517312&year=2017&details=517312.
\258\ See 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS Code 517312 (as of 10/1/22,
NAICS Code 517112).
\259\ See U.S. Census Bureau, 2017 Economic Census of the United
States, Employment Size of Firms for the U.S.: 2017, Table ID:
EC1700SIZEEMPFIRM, NAICS Code 517312, https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?y=2017&n=517312&tid=ECNSIZE2017.EC1700SIZEEMPFIRM&hidePreview=false.
\260\ Id. The available U.S. Census Bureau data does not provide
a more precise estimate of the number of firms that meet the SBA
size standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
97. The Commission does not generally track subsequent business
size unless, in the context of assignments or transfers, unjust
enrichment issues are implicated. Additionally, since the Commission
does not collect data on the number of employees for licensees
providing these services, at this time the Commission is not able to
estimate the number of licensees with active licenses that would
qualify as small under the SBA's small business size standard.
98. Other Communications Equipment Manufacturing. This industry
comprises establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing
communications equipment (except telephone apparatus, and radio and
television broadcast, and wireless communications equipment).\261\
Examples of such manufacturing include fire detection and alarm systems
manufacturing, Intercom systems and equipment manufacturing, and
signals (e.g., highway, pedestrian, railway, traffic)
manufacturing.\262\ The SBA small business size standard for this
industry classifies firms having 750 or fewer employees as small.\263\
For this industry, U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 shows that 321
firms operated for the entire year.\264\ Of that number, 310 firms
operated with fewer than 250
[[Page 43960]]
employees.\265\ Based on this data, the Commission concludes that the
majority of Other Communications Equipment Manufacturers are small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\261\ See U.S. Census Bureau, 2017 NAICS Definitions, ``334290
Other Communications Equipment Manufacturing,'' https://www.census.gov/naics/?input=334290&year=2017&details=334290.
\262\ Id.
\263\ See 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS Code 334290.
\264\ See U.S. Census Bureau, 2017 Economic Census of the United
States, Selected Sectors: Employment Size of Firms for the U.S.:
2017, Table ID: EC1700SIZEEMPFIRM, NAICS Code 334290, https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?y=2017&n=334290&tid=ECNSIZE2017.EC1700SIZEEMPFIRM&hidePreview=false.
\265\ Id. The available U.S. Census Bureau data does not provide
a more precise estimate of the number of firms that meet the SBA
size standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
99. 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.\266\ 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.\267\ The SBA small business size standard for
this industry classifies firms having 1,250 employees or less as
small.\268\ U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that there were 656
firms in this industry that operated for the entire year.\269\ Of this
number, 624 had fewer than 250 employees.\270\ Based on this data, the
Commission concludes that a majority of manufacturers in this industry
are small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\266\ See U.S. Census Bureau, 2017 NAICS Definition, ``334220
Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications
Equipment Manufacturing,'' https://www.census.gov/naics/?input=334220&year=2017&details=334220.
\267\ Id.
\268\ See 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS Code 334220.
\269\ See U.S. Census Bureau, 2017 Economic Census of the United
States, Employment Size of Firms for the U.S.: 2017, Table ID:
EC1700SIZEEMPFIRM, NAICS Code 334220, https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?y=2017&n=334220&tid=ECNSIZE2017.EC1700SIZEEMPFIRM&hidePreview=false.
\270\ Id. The available U.S. Census Bureau data does not
provide a more precise estimate of the number of firms that meet the
SBA size standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
100. Broadcast Auxiliary Services (BAS) Remote Pickup (RPU)
Licensees (TV Stations). Only licensees of broadcast stations,
broadcast networks, and cable networks can hold RPU licenses. BAS
involves a variety of transmitters, generally used to relay broadcast
programming to the public (through translator and booster stations) or
within the program distribution chain (from a remote news gathering
unit to the studio or from the studio to the transmitter). The
Commission nor the SBA has developed a small business size standard for
Broadcast Auxiliary Services (BAS) Remote Pickup (RPU) licensees.
Television Broadcasting \271\ is the closest industry with a SBA small
business size standard for Remote pickup BAS when used by a TV station.
The SBA small business size standard for this industry classifies a
business as small if it has $41.5 million or less in annual
receipts.\272\ 2017 U.S. Census Bureau indicates that 744 firms in this
industry operated for the entire year.\273\ Of that number, 657 firms
had revenue of less than $25,000,000.\274\ Based on this data the
Commission estimates that the majority of firms are small entities
under the SBA size standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\271\ See U.S. Census Bureau, 2017 NAICS Definition, ``515120
Television Broadcasting,'' https://www.census.gov/naics/?input=515120&year=2017&details=515120.
\272\ See 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS Code 515120 (as of 10/1/22 NAICS
Code 516120).
\273\ See U.S. Census Bureau, 2017 Economic Census of the United
States, Selected Sectors: Sales, Value of Shipments, or Revenue Size
of Firms for the U.S.: 2017, Table ID: EC1700SIZEREVFIRM, NAICS Code
515120,https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?y=2017&n=515120&tid=ECNSIZE2017.EC1700SIZEREVFIRM&hidePreview=false.
\274\ Id. The available U.S. Census Bureau data does not provide
a more precise estimate of the number of firms that meet the SBA
size standard. The Commission also notes that according to the U.S.
Census Bureau glossary, the terms receipts and revenues are used
interchangeably, see https://www.census.gov/glossary/#term_ReceiptsRevenueServices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
101. Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite). This
industry comprises establishments engaged in operating and maintaining
switching and transmission facilities to provide communications via the
airwaves.\275\ 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.\276\ The SBA size standard for this industry classifies a
business as small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees.\277\ U.S. Census
Bureau data for 2017 show that there were 2,893 firms in this industry
that operated for the entire year.\278\ Of that number, 2,837 firms
employed fewer than 250 employees.\279\ Additionally, based on
Commission data in the 2022 Universal Service Monitoring Report, as of
December 31, 2021, there were 594 providers that reported they were
engaged in the provision of wireless services.\280\ Of these providers,
the Commission estimates that 511 providers have 1,500 or fewer
employees.\281\ Consequently, using the SBA's small business size
standard, most of these providers can be considered small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\275\ See U.S. Census Bureau, 2017 NAICS Definition, ``517312
Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite),'' https://www.census.gov/naics/?input=517312&year=2017&details=517312.
\276\ Id.
\277\ See 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS Code 517312 (as of 10/1/22,
NAICS Code 517112).
\278\ See U.S. Census Bureau, 2017 Economic Census of the United
States, Employment Size of Firms for the U.S.: 2017, Table ID:
EC1700SIZEEMPFIRM, NAICS Code 517312, https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?y=2017&n=517312&tid=ECNSIZE2017.EC1700SIZEEMPFIRM&hidePreview=false.
\279\ Id. The available U.S. Census Bureau data does not provide
a more precise estimate of the number of firms that meet the SBA
size standard.
\280\ Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, Universal
Service Monitoring Report at 26, Table 1.12 (2022), https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-391070A1.pdf.
\281\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
102. 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.'' \282\ 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.\283\ U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that 275
firms in this industry operated for the entire year.\284\ Of this
number, 242 firms had revenue of less than $25 million.\285\
Additionally, based on Commission data in the 2022 Universal Service
Monitoring Report, as of December 31, 2021, there were 65 providers
that reported they were engaged in the provision of satellite
telecommunications services.\286\ Of these providers, the Commission
estimates that approximately 42 providers have 1,500 or fewer
employees.\287\ Consequently, using the SBA's small business size
standard, a
[[Page 43961]]
little more than half of these providers can be considered small
entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\282\ See U.S. Census Bureau, 2017 NAICS Definition, ``517410
Satellite Telecommunications,'' https://www.census.gov/naics/?input=517410&year=2017&details=517410.
\283\ See 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS Code 517410.
\284\ See U.S. Census Bureau, 2017 Economic Census of the United
States, Selected Sectors: Sales, Value of Shipments, or Revenue Size
of Firms for the U.S.: 2017, Table ID: EC1700SIZEREVFIRM, NAICS Code
517410, https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?y=2017&n=517410&tid=ECNSIZE2017.EC1700SIZEREVFIRM&hidePreview=false.
\285\ Id. The available U.S. Census Bureau data does not provide
a more precise estimate of the number of firms that meet the SBA
size standard. The Commission also notes that according to the U.S.
Census Bureau glossary, the terms receipts and revenues are used
interchangeably, see https://www.census.gov/glossary/#term_ReceiptsRevenueServices.
\286\ Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, Universal
Service Monitoring Report at 26, Table 1.12 (2022), https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-391070A1.pdf.
\287\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements for Small Entities
103. The Commission expects the rules proposed in the NPRM
governing the operations of new licensees in the 12.7 GHz band will
impose new reporting or recordkeeping and/or other compliance
obligations on small entities as well as other applicants and
licensees, if adopted. The rule changes proposed in this NPRM
sunsetting fixed service operations in the 12.7 GHz band, repacking
mobile BAS/CARS operations, and prohibiting certain fixed satellite
service operations in the band, could also impose other new compliance
obligations on small and other entities. In the event these proposed
actions are adopted, the NPRM seeks comment on relocation options and
on transition and protection mechanisms for incumbent non-Federal
operations. In the alternative, the NPRM explores the possibility of
shared use of the band. Finally, for newly licensed mobile and other
expanded uses in the 12.7 GHz band, the NPRM seeks comment on various
service rules that should apply, including construction benchmarks and
technical operating requirements. The projected reporting,
recordkeeping, and other compliance obligations proposed for small
entities and other licensees are described below.
104. Certification. In the Certification Requirement for Part 74
and Part 78 Licensees Order (Order) (FR 2023-13502), the Commission
directs each BAS and CARS licensee for each of their authorizations to
use the 12.7 GHz band to certify the accuracy of all information
reflected on each license, including whether the facilities are
operating as authorized. If a licensee is unable to make such a
certification for a given license, it must cancel or modify the license
in accordance with the Commission's rules. The Commission proposes in
the NPRM to protect only those BAS and CARS stations licensed in the
Universal Licensing System (ULS) and the Cable Operations and Licensing
System (COALS), respectively, for which the licensee timely files the
certification required in the Order. To minimize burdens on entities,
including small entities, the Commission exempted from the
certification requirement of 12.7 GHz band licenses for which the
licensee has filed an application in ULS or COALS on or after January
1, 2021. The NPRM does not require other incumbents to provide
certifications for their existing authorized operations at this time.
However, the Commission encourages all licensees to timely submit their
data and update their information because it may use this data to
inform its deliberations regarding the future use of the 12.7 GHz band.
Moreover, the NPRM emphasizes that the Commission's rules require all
in-band incumbents to operate in accordance with their authorizations
and that the latter must be kept current. Therefore, while providing
updated information may come at some cost, the revisions the Commission
may ultimately adopt should benefit small entities by providing them
with increased access to wireless spectrum, more information about
opportunities in the 12.7 GHz band, and more flexibility to provide a
wider range of services.
105. Transitioning Mechanism. In the NPRM, the Commission proposes
using the Emerging Technologies (ET) framework to relocate incumbent
licensees and to introduce new services into the 12.7 GHz band.
Pursuant to those procedures, if adopted, the Commission will set a
sunset date for this band by which incumbent licensees may not cause
harmful interference to new band entrants. Prior to this date, new
entrants will be allowed to negotiate with incumbents to gain early
entry into the band and, if necessary, may relocate the incumbents to
comparable facilities. Because new entrants may have to relocate
incumbents from a larger frequency range or greater geographic area
than where the new entrants will operate, certain expenses will be
placed upon incumbents by the proposed rules, and the Commission may
establishes a companion set of cost-sharing procedures.\288\ This
process may require small entities that are incumbent operators in the
band to participate in negotiations to reassign their spectrum access
rights, involving additional attendant costs. Incumbents operating in
the spectrum designated for new licensed mobile and expanded use would
further be required to relocate their operations to different bands,
potentially requiring reconfiguration or replacement of their existing
facilities, also at additional cost.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\288\ See Amendment to the Commission's Rules Regarding a Plan
for Sharing the Costs of Microwave Relocation, WT Docket No. 95-157,
Notice of Proposed Rule Making, 11 FCC Rcd 1923 (1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
106. The 12.7 GHz Band Plan. The Commission proposes to allocate
the 12.7 GHz band as an unpaired band and to license it on an
exclusive, geographic license area (using Partial Economic Areas (PEA))
basis, and in roughly 100 megahertz blocks without guard bands, which
will permit the filing of mutually exclusive applications. The
Commission's statutory authority to resolve mutually exclusive
applications for initial licenses through a system of competitive
bidding has lapsed.\289\ Accordingly, in the event the Commission
determines to adopt a mutually exclusive application approach, the
Commission seeks comments on how the Commission should resolve mutually
exclusive applications for new initial licenses in the 12.7 GHz band in
light of the lapse in its authority to use competitive bidding. In the
event that the Commission's statutory authority with respect to
auctions is restored, the Commission delegates authority to WTB and OEA
to seek comment on appropriate competitive bidding rules and
procedures, consistent with prior Commission guidance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\289\ See 47 U.S.C. 309(j)(11).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
107. Licensing and Operating Rules. In the NPRM, the Commission
proposes that licensees in the 12.7 GHz band would be required to
comply with certain licensing and operating rules applicable to all
part 27 services,\290\ flexible use,\291\ regulatory status,\292\
foreign ownership reporting,\293\ compliance with construction
notification requirements,\294\ renewal criteria,\295\ permanent
discontinuance of operations,\296\ partitioning and
disaggregation,\297\ and spectrum leasing.\298\ The Commission seeks
comment on this proposal and on certain other part 27 rules that may be
appropriate to apply to 12.7 GHz band licensees, or whether there are
any aspects of its general part 27 service
[[Page 43962]]
rules that should be modified to accommodate the particular
characteristics of the 12.7 GHz band. In addition, small entities and
other future 12.7 GHz band licensees will have to comply with service-
specific requirements for the band addressing eligibility, mobile
spectrum holdings policies, license term, performance requirements,
renewal term construction obligations, and other licensing and
operating rules, some of which include reporting and recordkeeping
obligations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\290\ The WRS Renewal 2nd R&O and FNPRM adopted a unified
framework for construction, renewal, and service continuity rules
for flexible use geographic licenses in the Wireless Radio Services.
See Amendment of Parts 1, 22, 24, 27, 74, 80, 90, 95, and 101 To
Establish Uniform License Renewal et al., WT Docket No. 10-112,
Second Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
and Order, 32 FCC Rcd 8874 (2017) (WRS Renewal Reform 2nd R&O and
FNPRM).
\291\ 47 CFR 2.106, 27.2, 27.3. Section 303(y) of the Act
provides the Commission with authority to provide for flexibility of
use if: ``(1) such use is consistent with international agreements
to which the United States is a party; and (2) the Commission finds,
after notice and an opportunity for public comment, that (A) such an
allocation would be in the public interest; (B) such use would not
deter investment in communications services and systems, or
technology development; and (C) such use would not result in harmful
interference among users.'' Balanced Budget Act of 1997, Public Law
105-33, 111 Stat. 251, 268-69; 47 U.S.C. 303(y).
\292\ 47 CFR 27.10.
\293\ 47 U.S.C. 310; 47 CFR 27.12.
\294\ 47 CFR 27.14(k).
\295\ Id. Sec. 1.949.
\296\ Id. Sec. 1.953.
\297\ Id. Sec. 1.950.
\298\ Id. Sec. 1.9001 through 1.9080.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
108. Alternatives for Sharing the Band. The sharing methods that
have been proven for white space devices and Citizens Broadband Radio
Service (CBRS), in conjunction with new or developing sharing
technologies, may be used in the 12.7 GHz band to maximize the use of
spectrum. Accordingly, the NPRM seeks comment on such methods as well
as on using an automated spectrum management system such as the
Automated Frequency Coordination (AFC) systems used in the 6 GHz band
or spectrum access systems used in CBRS as a method to enable spectrum
sharing in the 12.7 GHz band as an alternative to relocating incumbents
or repacking the band.
109. Eligibility, License Term and Renewal. An open eligibility
standard has been proposed for licensing in the 12.7 GHz band along
with a 10-year initial term for new licenses. The Commission also
proposes to apply its general part 27 renewal requirements for wireless
licenses as the renewal standard for the 12.7 GHz as the Commission did
in the 3.7 GHz Service and the 3.5 GHz band orders.
110. Performance Requirements. The NPRM seeks comment on requiring
a 12.7 GHz band licensee, deploying mobile or point-to-multipoint
service in accordance with its part 27 rules, to provide reliable
signal coverage and offer service to at least 30% to 45% of the
population in each of their license areas within five years of their
license issue date (interim performance benchmark), and to at least 60%
to 80% of the population in each of their license areas within ten
years from the license issue date (final performance benchmark). For
licensees deploying point-to-point service, the NPRM seeks comment on
requiring them to demonstrate within five years of the license issue
date (interim performance benchmark) that they have four links
operating and providing service, if the population within the license
area is equal to or less than 268,000. If the population within the
license area is greater than 268,000, a licensee deploying point-to-
point service would need to demonstrate that it has at least one link
in operation and providing service, either to customers or for internal
use, per every 67,000 persons within a license area. The Commission
proposes to require licensees deploying point-to-point service to
demonstrate within ten years of the license issue date (final
performance benchmark) that they have eight links operating and
providing service, either to customers or for internal use, if the
population within the license area is equal to or less than 268,000. If
the population within the license area is greater than 268,000, the
Commission proposes to require a licensee deploying point-to-point
service to demonstrate it is providing service and has at least two
links in operation per every 67,000 persons within a license area.
111. While the NPRM seeks comment on performance benchmarks based
on population coverage applicable for a range of fixed and mobile
services, the NPRM recognizes that 12.7 GHz licenses have flexibility
to provide services potentially less suited to a population coverage
metric. In particular, licensees providing Internet of Things-type
(IoT-type) fixed and mobile services may benefit from an alternative
performance benchmark metric. To account for this, the Commission
proposes that licensees providing IoT-type services would have
flexibility to demonstrate that they offer geographic area coverage of
at least 25% to 35% of the license area at the interim (five-year)
performance benchmark, and geographic area coverage of at least 50% to
65% of the license area at the final (ten-year) performance
benchmark.\299\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\299\ See, e.g., 47 CFR 27.14(v)(2) (requiring a 3.7 GHz Service
licensee providing Internet of Things service to offer geographic
area coverage of 35% of the license area within 8 years of initial
grant and geographic area coverage of 65% of the license area within
12 years of initial grant); 27.14(w)(1)(iii) (requiring a 3.45 GHz
Service licensee providing Internet of Things service to offer
geographic area coverage of 35% of the license area within 4 years
of initial grant and geographic area coverage of 65% of the license
area within 8 years of initial grant); 47 CFR 30.103, 30.104(b)
(requiring a UMFUS licensee providing Internet of Things or other
services deployed along non-traditional lines to offer geographic
area coverage of 25% of the license area within 10 years of initial
grant).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
112. Along with performance benchmarks, the NPRM seeks comment on
which penalties will most effectively ensure timely build-out.
Specifically, the NPRM states that, in the event a licensee fails to
meet the first performance benchmark, the licensee's final benchmark
and license term would be reduced by two years, thereby requiring it to
meet the final performance benchmark two years sooner (at eight years
into the license term) and reducing its license term to eight years. If
a licensee fails to meet the final performance benchmark for a
particular license area, its authorization for each license area in
which it fails to meet the performance requirement shall terminate
automatically without Commission action. The Commission seeks comment
on how, in the event a 12.7 GHz band licensee's authority to operate
terminates, its spectrum rights should become available for
reassignment pursuant to the licensing framework the Commission adopts
for this band. The Commission also seeks comment on whether, consistent
with the Commission's rules for other part 27 licenses, the Commission
should require that any 12.7 GHz band flexible use licensee that
forfeits its license for failure to meet its performance requirements
be precluded from regaining that license. Finally, the Commission seeks
comment on other performance requirements and enforcement mechanisms
that would effectively ensure timely buildout.
113. Compliance Procedures. In addition to compliance procedures
applicable to all part 27 licensees, including the filing of electronic
coverage maps and supporting documentation, the NPRM proposes that such
electronic coverage maps must accurately depict the boundaries of each
license area in the licensee's service territory. If a licensee does
not provide reliable signal coverage to an entire license area, the
NPRM proposes that its map must accurately depict the boundaries of the
area or areas within each license area not being served. Further, the
NPRM proposes that each licensee also must file supporting
documentation certifying the type of service it is providing for each
licensed area within its service territory and the type of technology
used to provide such service. Supporting documentation must include the
assumptions used to create the coverage maps, including the propagation
model and the signal strength necessary to provide reliable service
with the licensee's technology. The Commission seeks comment on these
proposals. The Commission also seeks comment on whether small entities
face any special or unique issues with respect to the transition such
that they would require additional time to comply.
114. Mobile Spectrum Holdings and Initial Licensing. Small entities
could be impacted by additional requirements pursuant to its request
for comment on how to address spectrum holdings issues involving the
12.7 GHz band. The Commission also seeks comment on whether or not to
include the 12.7 GHz band in the total spectrum screen or in
[[Page 43963]]
a separate spectrum screen; on how to address spectrum aggregation
issues in the initial licensing of this band; and, on whether there
should be a limit on the amount of 12.7 GHz band spectrum held by a
single entity at the licensing stage.
115. Technical Rules. Small entities and other licensees would also
be subject to certain technical rules established to maximize flexible
use of the 12.7 GHz band spectrum while minimizing the impact on
adjacent band incumbents, consistent with the public interest. In that
context, the NPRM proposes to adopt the same power limits that are
applied to UMFUS operations and it seeks comment on whether incumbent
satellite services and new terrestrial mobile services can coexist if
the latter will be subject to these power limits.
116. For out-of-band-emissions, the NPRM proposes that emissions be
kept to a level that will provide protection to incumbent services in
adjacent bands, while allowing the full use of the new band, and
additionally proposes to adopt a requirement that the conductive power
or the total radiated power of any emission outside a licensee's
frequency block shall be -13 dBm/MHz or lower. Further, the NPRM seeks
comment on whether additional technical protection criteria, beyond
out-of-band-emission limits, are necessary to ensure effective
coexistence with adjacent band FSS operations. To implement field
strength limit at market boundaries, the NPRM proposes to adopt a -77.6
dBm/m\2\/MHz power flux density limit at the service-area boundaries.
The NPRM also proposes that fixed and mobile operations be subject to
international agreements with Mexico and Canada.
117. To comply with the proposed rules in the NPRM, small entities
may be required to hire attorneys, engineers, consultants, or other
professionals. In particular, for small entities that are not existing
operators and do not have existing staffing dedicated to regulatory
compliance, engineering and legal expertise may be necessary to make
the requisite filings and to demonstrate compliance with the proposed
performance obligations. At this time, while the Commission cannot
quantify the cost of compliance with the proposed rule changes, the
Commission notes that several of the proposed changes are consistent
with and mirror existing policies and requirements used for other part
27 flexible use licenses. Therefore, small entities with existing
licenses in other bands may already be familiar with such policies and
requirements and have the processes and procedures in place to
facilitate compliance resulting in minimal incremental costs to comply
if similar requirements are adopted for this band. The Commission also
note that for most of the proposals and requests for comments in the
NPRM, the Commission also requests cost-benefit analyses. The
Commission expects that the information it receives in comments and
through cost-benefit analyses will help it identify and evaluate all
relevant matters associated with the proposed reallocation and the
relocation of public safety operations out of the band, including
compliance costs and other burdens on small entities.
D. Steps Taken To Minimize the Significant Economic Impact on Small
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered
118. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant,
specifically small business, alternatives 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.'' \300\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\300\ 5 U.S.C. 603(c)(1)-(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
119. In the NPRM, the Commission seeks to identify potential
opportunities for additional flexible access--particularly for wireless
broadband services--in the 12.7 GHz band. Throughout the NPRM, the
Commission considered the economic impact the proposed rules could have
on small businesses. For example, the Commission considered if there
were particular instances where certain parameters--such as use of
smaller license areas--could help small businesses. The use of smaller
license areas could potentially assist those small entities that favor
shared licensing regimes, and also could help promote rural deployments
by facilitating access to spectrum by small and regional service
providers and beyond.\301\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\301\ See supra at para. 46.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
120. The Commission also considered applying ten-year license terms
for any licensees issued in the 12.7 GHz band. This approach
specifically considers the potential impact to small entities, as they
must allocate resources carefully over the length of their license
term. Moreover, as small entities tend to have more limited funds,
should they be required to compete at auction for a particular license,
the certainty of a longer license term would provide licensees with
sufficient incentive to make the long-term investments necessary for
compliance. In the NPRM, the Commission seeks comments on this matter.
121. With respect to its proposal in the NPRM to protect only those
BAS and CARS stations licensed in ULS and COALS for which the licensee
timely files the certification required in the Order, see FCC 23-36,
paras. 143-147 (FR 2023-13502), published elsewhere in this issue of
the Federal Register, to minimize burdens on small and other entities,
the Commission exempted from the certification requirement 12.7 GHz
band licenses for which the licensee has filed an application in ULS
and COALS on or after January 1, 2021. Further, to minimize the
economic impact for any small entity that is required to be repacked to
a smaller portion of the 12.7 GHz band, the date that the Commission
will set for mobile BAS/CARS operators to cease operations in this band
will be set to provide them with enough notice to allow them to
relocate without causing disruption to their services. Likewise, the
sunset period for incumbent FS operations could potentially be set to
provide additional time in order to aid small entities.
122. To assist with the Commission's evaluation of the economic
impact on small entities that may result from the actions and
alternatives that have been proposed in this proceeding, the NPRM seeks
alternative proposals and requests information on the potential costs
of such alternatives to licensees. The Commission expects to consider
more fully the economic impact on small entities following its review
of comments filed in response to the NPRM, including costs and benefits
information. Alternative proposals and approaches from commenters would
also help the Commission further minimize the economic impact on small
entities. The Commission's evaluation of the comments filed in this
proceeding will shape the final conclusions it reaches, the final
alternatives it considers, and the actions it ultimately takes in this
proceeding to minimize any significant economic impact that may occur
on small entities from the final rules that are ultimately adopted.
E. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the
Proposed Rules
123. None.
[[Page 43964]]
III. Ordering Clauses
124. It is ordered that, pursuant to sections 1, 2, 4, 5, 301, 302,
303, 304, 307, 309, 310, and 316 of the Communications Act of 1934, 47
U.S.C. 151, 152, 154, 155, 301, 302a, 303, 304, 307, 309, 310, 316, and
Sec. 1.411 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.411, the Report and
Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking and Order in the captioned dockets is adopted.
125. The inquiry in Expanding Flexible Use in Mid-Band Spectrum
Between 3.7-24 GHz, GN Docket No. 17-183, is terminated as to the mid-
band spectrum between 12.2 GHz and 13.25 GHz.
126. It is further ordered that, pursuant to applicable procedures
set forth in Sec. Sec. 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules, 47
CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comment on the Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in WT Docket No. 20-443 and the Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking in GN Docket No. 22-352 on or before the number of
days shown on the first page of this document after publication in the
Federal Register, and reply comment on or before the number of days
shown on the first page of this document after publication in the
Federal Register.
127. It is further ordered that the Commission's Office of the
Secretary, Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of the
Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking and Order, including the associated Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analyses, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of
the Small Business Administration.
List of Subjects
47 CFR Part 1
Administrative practice and procedure.
47 CFR Part 25
Administrative practice and procedure, Satellites.
47 CFR Part 27
Common carriers, Communications, Radio.
47 CFR Part 74
Mexico, Television.
47 CFR Part 78
Cable television, Television.
47 CFR Part 101
Administrative practice and procedure.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene Dortch,
Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
Proposed Rules
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal
Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR parts 1, 2, 25, 27,
74, 78, and 101 as follows:
PART 1--PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
0
1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. chs. 2, 5, 9, 13; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note,
unless otherwise noted.
0
2. Amend Sec. 1.907 by revising the definition of ``Covered geographic
licenses'' to read as follows:
Sec. 1.907 Definitions.
* * * * *
Covered geographic licenses. Covered geographic licenses consist of
the following services: 1.4 GHz Service (part 27, subpart I of this
chapter); 1.6 GHz Service (part 27, subpart J); 24 GHz Service and
Digital Electronic Message Services (part 101, subpart G of this
chapter); 218-219 MHz Service (part 95, subpart F, of this chapter);
220-222 MHz Service, excluding public safety licenses (part 90, subpart
T, of this chapter); 600 MHz Service (part 27, subpart N); 700 MHz
Commercial Services (part 27, subparts F and H); 700 MHz Guard Band
Service (part 27, subpart G); 800 MHz Specialized Mobile Radio Service
(part 90, subpart S); 900 MHz Specialized Mobile Radio Service (part
90, subpart S); 900 MHz Broadband Service (part 27, subpart P); 3.45
GHz Service (part 27, subpart Q); 3.7 GHz Service (part 27, subpart O);
Advanced Wireless Services (part 27, subparts K and L); 12.7 GHz
Service (part 27, subpart R); Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service
(Commercial Aviation) (part 22, subpart G, of this chapter); Broadband
Personal Communications Service (part 24, subpart E, of this chapter);
Broadband Radio Service (part 27, subpart M); Cellular Radiotelephone
Service (part 22, subpart H); Citizens Broadband Radio Service (part
96, subpart C, of this chapter); Dedicated Short Range Communications
Service, excluding public safety licenses (part 90, subpart M);
Educational Broadband Service (part 27, subpart M); H Block Service
(part 27, subpart K); Local Multipoint Distribution Service (part 101,
subpart L); Multichannel Video Distribution and Data Service (part 101,
subpart P); Multilateration Location and Monitoring Service (part 90,
subpart M); Multiple Address Systems (EAs) (part 101, subpart O);
Narrowband Personal Communications Service (part 24, subpart D); Paging
and Radiotelephone Service (part 22, subpart E; part 90, subpart P);
VHF Public Coast Stations, including Automated Maritime
Telecommunications Systems (part 80, subpart J, of this chapter); Upper
Microwave Flexible Use Service (part 30 of this chapter); and Wireless
Communications Service (part 27, subpart D of this chapter).
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec. 1.9005 by:
0
a. Removing the word ``and'' at the end of paragraph (nn);
0
b. Removing the period at the end of paragraph (pp) and adding ``;
and'' in its place; and
0
c. Adding paragraph (qq).
The addition reads as follows:
Sec. 1.9005 Included services.
* * * * *
(qq) The 12.7 GHz Service in the 12.7-13.25 GHz band (part 27 of
this chapter).
PART 2--FREQUENCY ALLOCATIONS AND RADIO TREATY MATTERS; GENERAL
RULES AND REGULATIONS
0
4. 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
5. Amend Sec. 2.106, as amended June 7, 2023, at 88 FR 37318,
effective July 7, 2023, by revising ``Page 49'' in the Table of
Frequency Allocations and paragraphs (d)(52), (53), (57), and (118) to
read as follows:
Sec. 2.106 Table of Frequency Allocations.
* * * * *
[[Page 43965]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY23.107
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(52) NG 52 Except as provided for by paragraph (d)(527) of this
section, use of the band 10.7-11.7 GHz (space-to-Earth) by
geostationary satellites in the fixed-satellite service shall be
limited to international systems, i.e., other than domestic systems.
(53) NG53 The mobile BAS/CARS repack band(s) is reserved for
eligible incumbent television pickup (TVPU) and cable television relay
service (CARS) pickup stations (collectively, mobile BAS/CARS) that
were licensed to operate in the 12.7-13.25 GHz band pursuant to
applications filed before September 19, 2022.
* * * * *
(57) NG57 In the band 12.7-13.25 GHz, the following provisions
shall apply:
(i) Emerging Technologies. Except as provided in paragraph (d)(53)
of this section and this paragraph (d)(57), the band is designated for
emerging technologies under part 27 of this chapter.
(ii) Fixed Satellite Service incumbents. Any FSS space station or
earth station authorized to serve or operate in the United States in
accordance with the Table of Allocations based on a petition for market
access or application filed before September 19, 2022, may continue
such Earth-to-space operations on a primary basis. For such incumbent
FSS stations, the use of the band 12.75-13.25 GHz by geostationary
satellites is limited to international systems, i.e., other than
domestic systems; non-geostationary-satellite systems are limited to
communications with individually licensed incumbent earth stations. In
the sub-band 13.15-13.2125 GHz, NGSO FSS gateway uplink transmissions
shall be limited to a maximum e.i.r.p. of 3.2 dBW towards 0[deg] on the
radio horizon.
(A) On or after September 19, 2022, petitions for market access or
applications for new or modified FSS space stations and earth stations
are unacceptable for filing and shall be dismissed, with the following
exceptions:
(1) Space stations. Applications for space stations limited to
serving earth stations outside the United States,
[[Page 43966]]
applications for modification of existing space station authorizations,
see Sec. 25.117 of this chapter, applications to relocate existing
space stations pursuant to the Commission's fleet management policy,
see Sec. 25.118(e) of this chapter, and applications for replacement
space stations.
(2) Earth stations. Applications for renewal or cancellation of
incumbent earth station authorizations, modifications to correct
location or other data required in the incumbent earth station file,
and modifications not requiring prior Commission authorization, see
Sec. 25.118(a) and (b) of this chapter.
(B) [Reserved]
(iii) Fixed Service and Mobile Service incumbents. Licensees of
Fixed Service or Mobile Service authorized based on an application
filed before September 19, 2022, pursuant to part 74, 78, or 101 of
this chapter may continue to operate as authorized until the applicable
sunset date.
(A) On or after September 19, 2022, applications for new or
modified Fixed Service or Mobile Service operations under parts 74, 78,
and 101 are unacceptable for filing and shall be dismissed, with the
following exceptions:
(1) Mobile BAS/CARS repack. Applications for modification by
incumbent mobile BAS/CARS licensees to relocate to the mobile BAS/CARS
repack band (see paragraph (d)(53) of this section).
(2) Other. Applications for renewal, cancellation, or minor
modification (if the incumbent licensee establishes that the
modification would not add to any relocation costs).
(B) [Reserved]
* * * * *
(118) NG118 In the bands 2025-2110 MHz, and 6875-7125 MHz,
television translator relay stations may be authorized to use
frequencies on a secondary basis to other stations in the Television
Broadcast Auxiliary Service that are operating in accordance with the
Table of Frequency Allocations in this section.
* * * * *
PART 25--SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS
0
6. 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
7. Amend Sec. 25.115 by revising the paragraph (e) heading and adding
paragraphs (e)(2) and (f)(4) to read as follows:
Sec. 25.115 Applications for earth station authorizations.
* * * * *
(e) GSO FSS earth stations in 12.7-13.25 GHz and 17.8-30 GHz. * * *
(2) On or after September 19, 2022, applications for new or
modified GSO FSS earth station licenses in the 12.7-13.25 GHz band are
unacceptable for filing and shall be dismissed, with the exception of
applications for renewal or cancellation of incumbent earth station
authorizations, and modifications to correct location or other data
required in the incumbent earth station file, and modifications not
requiring prior Commission authorization, see Sec. 25.118(a) and (b).
(f) * * *
(4) On or after September 19, 2022, applications for new or
modified earth station licenses in the 12.7-13.25 GHz band are
unacceptable for filing and shall be dismissed, with the exception of
applications for renewal or cancellation of incumbent earth station
authorizations, and modifications to correct location or other data
required in the incumbent earth station file, and modifications not
requiring prior Commission authorization, see Sec. 25.118(a) and (b).
* * * * *
PART 27--MISCELLANEOUS WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES
0
8. The authority citation for part 27 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 301, 302a, 303, 307, 309, 332, 336,
337, 1403, 1404, 1451, and 1452, unless otherwise noted.
0
9. Amend Sec. 27.1 by adding paragraph (b)(18) to read as follows:
Sec. 27.1 Basis and purpose.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(18) 12.7-13.25 GHz.
* * * * *
0
10. Amend Sec. 27.2 by adding paragraph (f) to read as follows:
Sec. 27.2 Permissible communications.
* * * * *
(f) 12.7-13.25 GHz band. The 12.7-13.25 GHz frequencies may not be
used for downlink satellite transmission.
0
11. Amend Sec. 27.4 by adding a definition for ``12.7 GHz Service'' in
alphanumerical order to read as follows:
Sec. 27.4 Terms and definitions.
* * * * *
12.7 GHz Service. A radiocommunication service licensed under this
part for the frequency bands specified in Sec. 27.5(p) (12.7-13.25 GHz
band).
* * * * *
0
12. Amend Sec. 27.5 by adding paragraph (p) to read as follows:
Sec. 27.5 Frequencies.
* * * * *
(p) 12.7-13.25 GHz band. The 12.7 GHz Service is licensed as five
individual 100 megahertz blocks [and one smaller block depending on
resolution of mobile BAS/CARS repack band] available for assignment on
a Partial Economic Area basis, see Sec. 27.6(o).
0
13. Amend Sec. 27.6 by adding paragraph (o) to read as follows:
Sec. 27.6 Service areas.
* * * * *
(o) 12.7-13.25 GHz band. Service areas in the 12.7 GHz Service are
based on Partial Economic Areas (PEAs) as defined by appendix A to this
subpart.
0
14. Amend Sec. 27.11 by adding paragraph (n) to read as follows:
Sec. 27.11 Initial authorization.
* * * * *
(n) 12.7-13.25 GHz band. Authorizations for licenses in the 12.7
GHz Service will be based on Partial Economic Areas (PEAs), as
specified in Sec. 27.6(o), and the frequency blocks specified in Sec.
27.5(p).
0
15. Amend Sec. 27.13 by adding paragraph (p) to read as follows:
Sec. 27.13 License period.
* * * * *
(p) 12.7-13.25 GHz band. Authorization for the band will have a
term not to exceed ten (10) years from the date of issuance.
0
16. Amend Sec. 27.14 by revising paragraphs (a) and (k) and adding
paragraph (x) to read as follows:
Sec. 27.14 Construction requirements.
(a) AWS and WCS licensees, with the exception of WCS licensees
holding authorizations for the 600 MHz band, Block A in the 698-704 MHz
and 728-734 MHz bands, Block B in the 704-710 MHz and 734-740 MHz
bands, Block E in the 722-728 MHz band, Block C, C1 or C2 in the 746-
757 MHz and 776-787 MHz bands, Block A in the 2305-2310 MHz and 2350-
2355 MHz bands, Block B in the 2310-2315 MHz and 2355-2360 MHz bands,
Block C in the 2315-2320 MHz band, Block D in the 2345-2350 MHz band,
in the 3450-3550 MHz band, in the 3700-3980 MHz band, and in the 12.7-
13.25 GHz band, and with the exception of licensees holding AWS
authorizations in the 1915-1920 MHz and 1995-2000 MHz bands, the 2000-
[[Page 43967]]
2020 MHz and 2180-2200 MHz bands, or 1695-1710 MHz, 1755-1780 MHz and
2155-2180 MHz bands, must, as a performance requirement, make a showing
of ``substantial service'' in their license area within the prescribed
license term set forth in Sec. 27.13. ``Substantial service'' is
defined as service which is sound, favorable and substantially above a
level of mediocre service which just might minimally warrant renewal.
Failure by any licensee to meet this requirement will result in
forfeiture of the license and the licensee will be ineligible to regain
it.
* * * * *
(k) Licensees holding WCS or AWS authorizations in the spectrum
blocks enumerated in paragraphs (g), (h), (i), (q), (r), (s), (t), (v),
(w), and (x) of this section, including any licensee that obtained its
license pursuant to the procedures set forth in paragraph (j) of this
section, shall demonstrate compliance with performance requirements by
filing a construction notification with the Commission, within 15 days
of the expiration of the applicable benchmark, in accordance with the
provisions set forth in Sec. 1.946(d) of this chapter. The licensee
must certify whether it has met the applicable performance
requirements. The licensee must file a description and certification of
the areas for which it is providing service. The construction
notifications must include electronic coverage maps, supporting
technical documentation and any other information as the Wireless
Telecommunications Bureau may prescribe by public notice.
* * * * *
(x) The following provisions apply to any licensee holding an
authorization in the 12.7-13.25 GHz band:
(1) Licensees relying on mobile or point-to-multipoint service
shall provide reliable signal coverage and offer service within five
(5) years from the date of the initial license to at least forty-five
(45) percent of the population in each of its license areas (``First
Buildout Requirement''). Licensee shall provide reliable signal
coverage and offer service within ten (10) years from the date of the
initial license to at least eighty (80) percent of the population in
each of its license areas (``Second Buildout Requirement''). Licensees
relying on point-to-point service shall demonstrate within five years
of the license issue date that they have four links operating and
providing service to customers or for internal use if the population
within the license area is equal to or less than 268,000 and, if the
population is greater than 268,000, that they have at least one link in
operation and providing service to customers, or for internal use, per
every 67,000 persons within a license area (``First Buildout
Requirement''). Licensees relying on point-to-point service shall
demonstrate within 10 years of the license issue date that they have
eight links operating and providing service to customers or for
internal use if the population within license area is equal to or less
than 268,000 and, if the population within the license area is greater
than 268,000, shall demonstrate they are providing service and have at
least two links in operation per every 67,000 persons within a license
area (``Second Buildout Requirement'').
(2) In the alternative, a licensee offering Internet of Things-type
services shall provide geographic area coverage within five (5) years
from the date of the initial license to at least thirty-five (35)
percent of the license (``First Buildout Requirement''). A licensee
offering Internet of Things-type services shall provide geographic area
coverage within ten (10) years from the date of the initial license to
at least sixty-five (65) percent of the license (``Second Buildout
Requirement'').
(3) If a licensee fails to establish that it meets the First
Buildout Requirement for a particular license area, the licensee's
Second Buildout Requirement deadline and license term will be reduced
by two years. If a licensee fails to establish that it meets the Second
Buildout Requirement for a particular license area, its authorization
for each license area in which it fails to meet the Second Buildout
Requirement shall terminate automatically without Commission action,
and the licensee will be ineligible to regain it if the Commission
makes the license available at a later date.
(4) To demonstrate compliance with these performance requirements,
licensees shall use the most recently available decennial U.S. Census
Data at the time of measurement and shall base their measurements of
population or geographic area served on areas no larger than the Census
Tract level. The population or area within a specific Census Tract (or
other acceptable identifier) will be deemed served by the licensee only
if it provides reliable signal coverage to and offers service within
the specific Census Tract (or other acceptable identifier). To the
extent the Census Tract (or other acceptable identifier) extends beyond
the boundaries of a license area, a licensee with authorizations for
such areas may include only the population or geographic area within
the Census Tract (or other acceptable identifier) towards meeting the
performance requirement of a single, individual license. If a licensee
does not provide reliable signal coverage to an entire license area,
the license must provide a map that accurately depicts the boundaries
of the area or areas within each license area not being served. Each
licensee also must file supporting documentation certifying the type of
service it is providing for each licensed area within its service
territory and the type of technology used to provide such service.
Supporting documentation must include the assumptions used to create
the coverage maps, including the propagation model and the signal
strength necessary to provide reliable service with the licensee's
technology.
0
17. Amend Sec. 27.50 by adding paragraph (l) to read as follows:
Sec. 27.50 Power limits and duty cycle.
* * * * *
(l) The following power requirements apply to stations transmitting
in the 12.7-13.25 GHz band:
(1) For fixed and base stations operating in connection with mobile
systems, the average power of the sum of all antenna elements is
limited to an equivalent isotopically radiated power (EIRP) density of
+75dBm/100 MHz. For channel bandwidths less than 100 megahertz the EIRP
must be reduced proportionally and linearly based on the bandwidth
relative to 100 megahertz.
(2) For mobile stations, the average power of the sum of all
antenna elements is limited to a maximum EIRP of +43 dBm.
(3) For transportable stations (transmitting equipment that is not
intended to be used while in motion, but rather at stationary
locations), the average power of the sum of all antenna elements is
limited to a maximum EIRP of +55 dBm.
(4) Equipment employed must be authorized in accordance with the
provisions of Sec. 27.51. Power measurements for transmissions by
stations authorized under this section may be made either in accordance
with a Commission-approved average power technique or in compliance
with paragraph (j)(5) of this section.
(5) Peak transmit power must be measured over any interval of
continuous transmission using instrumentation calibrated in terms of an
rms-equivalent voltage. The measurement results shall be properly
adjusted for any instrument limitations, such as detector response
times, limited resolution bandwidth capability when compared to the
emission bandwidth, sensitivity, and any other relevant factors, so as
to obtain a true peak
[[Page 43968]]
measurement for the emission in question over the full bandwidth of the
channel.
* * * * *
0
18. Amend Sec. 27.53 by adding paragraph (p) to read as follows:
Sec. 27.53 Emission limits.
* * * * *
(p) 12.7 GHz Service. The following emission limits apply to
stations transmitting in the 12.7-13.25 GHz band:
(1) For base station operations in the 12.7-13.25 GHz band, the
conducted power or the total radiated power of any emission outside the
licensee's authorized bandwidth shall not exceed -13 dBm/MHz.
Compliance with this paragraph (p)(1) is based on the use of
measurement instrumentation employing a resolution bandwidth of 1
megahertz or greater. However, in the 1 megahertz bands immediately
outside and adjacent to the licensee's frequency block, a resolution
bandwidth of at least one percent of the emission bandwidth of the
fundamental emission of the transmitter may be employed.
(2) For mobile operations in the 12.7-13.25 GHz band, the conducted
power or the total radiated power of any emission outside the
licensee's authorized bandwidth shall not exceed -13 dBm/MHz.
Compliance with this paragraph (p)(2) is based on the use of
measurement instrumentation employing a resolution bandwidth of 1
megahertz or greater.
0
19. Amend Sec. 27.55 by adding paragraph (f) to read as follows:
Sec. 27.55 Power strength limits.
* * * * *
(f) Power flux density for stations operating in the 12.7-13.25 GHz
band. For base and fixed stations operation in the 12.7-13.25 GHz band
in accordance with the provisions of Sec. 27.50(j), the power flux
density (PFD) at any location on the geographical border of a
licensee's service area shall not exceed -77.6 dBm/m\2\/MHz. This power
flux density will be measured at 1.5 meters above ground. Licensees in
adjacent geographic areas may voluntarily agree to operate under a
higher PFD at their common boundary.
0
20. Amend Sec. 27.57 by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 27.57 International coordination.
* * * * *
(c) Operation in the 1695-1710 MHz, 1710-1755 MHz, 1755-1780 MHz,
1915-1920 MHz, 1995-2000 MHz, 2000-2020 MHz, 2110-2155 MHz, 2155-2180
MHz, 2180-2200 MHz, 3450-3550 MHz, 3700-3980 MHz, and 12.7-13.25 GHz
bands is subject to international agreements with Mexico and Canada.
0
21. Add subpart R to read as follows:
Subpart R--12.7 GHz Service (12.7-13.25 GHz)
Sec.
Relocation of Incumbent Operations in the 12.7-13.25 GHz Band
27.1711 Relocation of fixed microwave services, broadcast auxiliary
services, and cable television relay services in the 12.7-13.25 GHz
band.
Protection of Incumbent Operations in the 12.7-13.25 GHz Band
27.1712 Protection of fixed operations in the 12.7-13.25 GHz band.
27.1713 Protection of Federal Government operations in the 12.7-
13.25 GHz band.
27.1714 Interference to Emerging Technologies licensees in the 12.7-
13.25 GHz band from Earth stations in the Fixed Satellite Service.
Cost-Sharing Policies Governing Relocation From the 12.7-13.25 GHz Band
27.1760 Cost-sharing requirements for Emerging Technologies in the
12.7-13.25 GHz band.
27.1761 Administration of the cost-sharing plan.
27.1762 The cost-sharing formula.
27.1763 Reimbursement under the cost-sharing plan.
27.1764 Triggering a reimbursement obligation.
27.1765 Payment issues.
27.1766 Dispute resolution under the cost-sharing plan.
27.1767 Termination of cost-sharing obligations.
Subpart R--12.7 GHz Service (12.7-13.25 GHz)
Relocation of Incumbent Operations in the 12.7-13.25 GHz Band
Sec. 27.1711 Relocation of fixed microwave services, broadcast
auxiliary services, and cable television relay services in the 12.7-
13.25 GHz band.
This part and parts 74, 78, and 101 of this chapter contain
provisions governing the relocation of incumbent Fixed Microwave
Services (FS) (see part 101), Broadcast Auxiliary Services (BAS) (see
part 74), and Cable Television Relay Services (CARS) (see part 78) in
the 12.7-13.25 GHz bands. The relocation of fixed microwave, BAS, and
CARS are governed by this part and part 101. The relocation of mobile
BAS and CARS licensees are governed, respectively, by Sec. Sec. 74.690
and 78.40 of this chapter.
Protection of Incumbent Operations in the 12.7-13.25 GHz Band
Sec. 27.1712 Protection of fixed operations in the 12.7-13.25 GHz
band.
All Emerging Technologies (ET) licensees, prior to initiating
operations from any base or fixed station in the 12.7-13.25 GHz band,
must coordinate their frequency usage with co-channel and adjacent-
channel fixed incumbents authorized under parts 74, 78, and 101 of this
chapter. Coordination shall be conducted in accordance with the
provisions of Sec. 24.237 of this chapter.
Sec. 27.1713 Protection of Federal Government operations in the 12.7-
13.25 GHz band.
The band 12.75-13.25 GHz is allocated to the space research (deep
space) (space-to-Earth) service for reception only at Goldstone, CA
(35[deg]20' N, 116[deg]53' W). See Sec. 2.106(c)(251) of this chapter.
The 12.7-13.25 GHz band includes a Federal allocation for reception-
only by a satellite ground station at the Goldstone Deep Space
Communications Complex (Goldstone Observatory), operated by the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).
Sec. 27.1714 Interference to Emerging Technologies licensees in the
12.7-13.25 GHz band from Earth stations in the Fixed Satellite Service.
An ET licensee in the 12.7-13.25 GHz band must accept or protect
itself from interference from earth stations that were authorized to
transmit (Earth-to-space) in the band based on an application filed
before September 19, 2022.
Cost-Sharing Policies Governing Relocation From the 12.7-13.25 GHz Band
Sec. 27.1760 Cost-sharing requirements for Emerging Technologies in
the 12.7-13.25 GHz band.
Frequencies in the 12.7-13.25 GHz band have been reallocated from
Fixed Microwave Services (FS) (see part 101 of this chapter), Broadcast
Auxiliary Services (BAS) (see part 74 of this chapter), Cable
Television Relay Services (CARS) (see part 78 of this chapter), and
Fixed Satellite Services (FSS) (see part 25 of this chapter) to use by
Emerging Technologies (ET) (as reflected in Sec. 2.106 of this
chapter). The relocation of fixed microwave links, including fixed BAS
and CARS, are governed by this part and part 101 and referred to as
microwave licensee(s) in this section. The relocation of mobile BAS and
CARS operations are governed, respectively, by Sec. Sec. 74.690 and
78.40 of this chapter. ET entities are required to
[[Page 43969]]
relocate an existing microwave licensee in these bands if interference
to the existing microwave licensee would occur. All ET entities that
benefit from the clearance of this spectrum by other ET entities or by
a voluntarily relocating microwave incumbent must contribute to such
relocation costs. ET entities may satisfy their reimbursement
requirement by entering into private cost-sharing agreements or
agreeing to terms other than those specified in Sec. 27.1762. However,
ET entities are required to reimburse other ET entities or voluntarily
relocating microwave incumbents that incur relocation costs and are not
parties to the alternative agreement. In addition, parties to a private
cost-sharing agreement may seek reimbursement through the clearinghouse
(as discussed in Sec. 27.1761) from ET entities that are not parties
to the agreement. The cost-sharing plan is in effect during all phases
of the relocation. If an ET licensee enters into a spectrum leasing
arrangement (as set forth in part 1, subpart X, of this chapter) and
the spectrum lessee triggers a cost-sharing obligation, the licensee is
the ET entity responsible for satisfying the cost-sharing obligations
under Sec. Sec. 27.1760 through 27.1767.
Sec. 27.1761 Administration of the cost-sharing plan.
The Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, under delegated authority,
will select one or more entities to operate as a neutral, not-for-
profit clearinghouse(s). This clearinghouse(s) will administer the
cost-sharing plan by, inter alia, determining the cost-sharing
obligation of ET entities for the relocation of incumbents from the
12.7-13.25 GHz band. The clearinghouse filing requirements (see
Sec. Sec. 27.1763 through 27.1765) will not take effect until an
administrator is selected.
Sec. 27.1762 The cost-sharing formula.
An ET relocator who relocates an interfering microwave link, i.e.,
one that is in all or part of its market area and in all or part of its
frequency band or a voluntarily relocating microwave incumbent, is
entitled to pro rata reimbursement based on the following formula:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY23.108
(a) RN equals the amount of reimbursement.
(b) C equals the actual cost of relocation. Actual relocation costs
include, but are not limited to, such items as: Radio terminal
equipment (TX and/or RX--antenna, necessary feed lines, MUX/Modems);
towers and/or modifications; back-up power equipment; monitoring or
control equipment; engineering costs (design/path survey);
installation; systems testing; FCC filing costs; site acquisition and
civil works; zoning costs; training; disposal of old equipment; test
equipment (vendor required); spare equipment; project management; prior
coordination notification under Sec. 101.103(d) of this chapter; site
lease renegotiation; required antenna upgrades for interference
control; power plant upgrade (if required); electrical grounding
systems; Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) (if required);
alternate transport equipment; and leased facilities. Increased
recurring costs represent part of the actual cost of relocation and,
even if the compensation to the incumbent is in the form of a
commitment to pay five years of charges, the ET relocator is entitled
to seek immediate reimbursement of the lump sum amount based on present
value using current interest rates, provided it has entered into a
legally binding agreement to pay the charges. C also includes
voluntarily relocating incumbent's independent third-party appraisal of
its compensable relocation costs and incumbent transaction expenses
that are directly attributable to the relocation, subject to a cap of
two percent of the ``hard'' costs involved. Hard costs are defined as
the actual costs associated with providing a replacement system, such
as equipment and engineering expenses. C may not exceed $125,000 per
link, with an additional $150,000 permitted if a new or modified tower
is required.
(c) N equals the number of ET entities that have triggered a cost-
sharing obligation. For the ET relocator, N = 1. For the next ET entity
triggering a cost-sharing obligation, N = 2, and so on. In the case of
a voluntarily relocating incumbent, N = 1 for the first ET entity
triggering a cost-sharing obligation. For the next ET entity triggering
a cost-sharing obligation, N = 2, and so on.
(d) Tm equals the number of months that have elapsed between the
month the ET relocator or voluntarily relocating incumbent obtains
reimbursement rights for the link and the month in which an ET entity
triggers a cost-sharing obligation. An ET relocator obtains
reimbursement rights for the link on the date that it signs a
relocation agreement with an incumbent. A voluntarily relocating
incumbent obtains reimbursement rights for the link on the date that
the incumbent notifies the Commission that it intends to discontinue,
or has discontinued, the use of the link, pursuant to Sec. 101.305, if
applicable, or Sec. 1.953 of this chapter.
Sec. 27.1763 Reimbursement under the cost-sharing plan.
(a) Registration of reimbursement rights. Claims for reimbursement
under the cost-sharing plan are limited to relocation expenses incurred
on or after the date when the first ET license is issued in the
relevant 12.7-13.25 GHz band (start date). If a clearinghouse is not
selected by that date (see Sec. 27.1764) claims for reimbursement
under this section and notices of operation (see Sec. 27.1765) for
activities that occurred after the start date but prior to the
clearinghouse selection must be submitted to the clearinghouse within
30 calendar days of the selection date.
(1) To obtain reimbursement, an ET relocator must submit
documentation of the relocation agreement to the clearinghouse within
30 calendar days of the date a relocation agreement is signed with an
incumbent. In the case of involuntary relocation, an ET relocator must
submit documentation of the relocated system within 30 calendar days
after the end of the relocation.
(2) To obtain reimbursement, a voluntarily relocating incumbent
must submit documentation of the relocation of the link to the
clearinghouse within 30 calendar days of the date that the incumbent
notifies the Commission that it intends to discontinue, or has
discontinued, the use of the link, pursuant to Sec. 101.305 of this
chapter.
(b) Documentation of expenses. Once relocation occurs, the ET
relocator, or the voluntarily relocating incumbent, must submit
documentation itemizing
[[Page 43970]]
the amount spent for items specifically listed in Sec. 27.1762(b), as
well as any reimbursable items not specifically listed in Sec.
27.1762(b) that are directly attributable to actual relocation costs.
Specifically, the ET relocator, or the voluntarily relocating incumbent
must submit, in the first instance, only the uniform cost data
requested by the clearinghouse along with a copy, without redaction, of
either the relocation agreement, if any, or the third party appraisal
described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, if relocation was
undertaken by the microwave incumbent. ET relocators and voluntarily
relocating incumbents must maintain documentation of cost-related
issues until the applicable sunset date and provide such documentation
upon request, to the clearinghouse, the Commission, or entrants that
trigger a cost-sharing obligation. If an ET relocator pays an incumbent
a monetary sum to relocate its own facilities, the ET relocator must
estimate the costs associated with relocating the incumbent by
itemizing the anticipated cost for items listed in Sec. 27.1762(b). If
the sum paid to the incumbent cannot be accounted for, the remaining
amount is not eligible for reimbursement.
(1) Third party appraisal. A voluntarily relocating incumbent, must
also submit an independent third party appraisal of its compensable
relocation costs. The appraisal should be based on the actual cost of
replacing the incumbent's system with comparable facilities and should
exclude the cost of any equipment upgrades or items outside the scope
of Sec. 27.1762(b).
(2) Identification of links. The ET relocator or the voluntarily
relocating incumbent must identify the particular link associated with
appropriate expenses (i.e., costs may not be averaged over numerous
links).
(c) Full reimbursement. An ET relocator who relocates a microwave
link that is either fully outside its market area or its licensed
frequency band may seek full reimbursement through the clearinghouse of
compensable costs, up to the reimbursement cap as defined in Sec.
27.1762(b). Such reimbursement will not be subject to depreciation
under the cost-sharing formula.
(d) Good faith requirement. New entrants and incumbent licensees
are expected to act in good faith in satisfying the cost-sharing
obligations under Sec. Sec. 27.1760 through 27.1767. The requirement
to act in good faith extends to, but is not limited to, the preparation
and submission of the documentation required in paragraph (b) of this
section.
(e) Reimbursement for self-relocating incumbents in the 12.7-13.25
GHz band. Where a voluntarily relocating incumbent relocates its own
links, it is entitled to reimbursement from the first ET beneficiary
for its actual costs for relocating the links, subject to the
reimbursement cap in Sec. 27.1762(b). This amount is subject to
depreciation as specified in Sec. 27.1762(b). An ET licensee who is
obligated to reimburse relocation costs under this paragraph (e) is
entitled to obtain reimbursement from other ET beneficiaries in
accordance with Sec. Sec. 27.1762 and 27.1764. For purposes of
applying the cost-sharing formula relative to other ET licensees that
benefit from the self-relocation, depreciation shall run from the date
on which the clearinghouse issues the notice of an obligation to
reimburse the voluntarily relocating microwave incumbent.
Sec. 27.1764 Triggering a reimbursement obligation.
(a) The clearinghouse will apply the following test to determine
when an ET entity has triggered a cost-sharing obligation and therefore
must pay an ET relocator or a voluntarily relocating incumbent in
accordance with the formula detailed in Sec. 27.1762:
(1) All or part of the relocated microwave link was initially co-
channel with the licensed ET band of the ET entity;
(2) An ET relocator or a voluntarily relocating incumbent has paid
the relocation costs of the incumbent; and
(3) The ET entity is operating or preparing to turn on a fixed base
station at commercial power and the fixed base station is located
within a rectangle (Proximity Threshold) described as follows:
(i) The length of the rectangle shall be x where x is a line
extending through both nodes of the microwave link to a distance of 48
kilometers (30 miles) beyond each node. The width of the rectangle
shall be y where y is a line perpendicular to x and extending for a
distance of 24 kilometers (15 miles) on both sides of x. Thus, the
rectangle is represented as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY23.109
(ii) If the application of the Proximity Threshold Test indicates
that a reimbursement obligation exists, the clearinghouse will
calculate the reimbursement amount in accordance with the cost-sharing
formula and notify the ET entity of the total amount of its
reimbursement obligation.
(b) Once a reimbursement obligation is triggered, the ET entity may
not avoid paying its cost-sharing obligation by deconstructing or
modifying its facilities.
Sec. 27.1765 Payment issues.
Prior to initiating operations for a newly constructed site or
modified existing site, an ET entity is required to file a notice
containing site-specific data with the clearinghouse. The notice
regarding the new or modified site must provide a detailed description
of the proposed site's spectral frequency use and geographic location,
including but not limited to the applicant's name and address, the name
of the transmitting
[[Page 43971]]
base station, the geographic coordinates corresponding to that base
station, the frequencies and polarizations to be added, changed or
deleted, and the emission designator. If a prior coordination notice
(PCN) under Sec. 101.103(d) of this chapter is prepared, ET entities
can satisfy the site-data filing requirement by submitting a copy of
their PCN to the clearinghouse. ET entities that file either a notice
or a PCN have a continuing duty to maintain the accuracy of the site-
specific data on file with the clearinghouse. Utilizing the site-
specific data, the clearinghouse will determine if any reimbursement
obligation exists and notify the ET entity in writing of its repayment
obligation, if any. When the ET entity receives a written copy of such
obligation, it must pay directly to the relocator the amount owed
within 30 calendar days.
Sec. 27.1766 Dispute resolution under the cost-sharing plan.
(a) Disputes. Disputes arising out of the cost-sharing plan, such
as disputes over the amount of reimbursement required, must be brought,
in the first instance, to the clearinghouse for resolution. To the
extent that disputes cannot be resolved by the clearinghouse, parties
are encouraged to use expedited Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
procedures, such as binding arbitration, mediation, or other ADR
techniques.
(b) Evidentiary requirement. Parties of interest contesting the
clearinghouse's determination of specific cost-sharing obligations must
provide evidentiary support to demonstrate that their calculation is
reasonable and made in good faith. Specifically, these parties are
expected to exercise due diligence to obtain the information necessary
to prepare an independent estimate of the relocation costs in question
and to file the independent estimate and supporting documentation with
the clearinghouse.
Sec. 27.1767 Termination of cost-sharing obligations.
The cost-sharing plan will sunset for all ET entities on the same
date on which the relocation obligation for the 12.7-13.25 GHz band
terminates. ET entrants that trigger a cost-sharing obligation prior to
the sunset date must satisfy their payment obligation in full.
PART 74--EXPERIMENTAL RADIO, AUXILIARY, SPECIAL BROADCAST AND OTHER
PROGRAM DISTRIBUTIONAL SERVICES
0
22. The authority citation for part 74 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 302a, 303, 307, 309, 310, 325, 336
and 554.
0
23. Amend Sec. 74.602 by revising paragraph (a) introductory text and
footnote 2 in the table following paragraph (a) introductory text to
read as follows:
Sec. 74.602 Frequency assignment.
(a) The following frequencies are available for assignment to
television pickup, television STL, television relay and television
translator relay stations. The band segments 17,700-18,580, and 19,260-
19,700 MHz are available for broadcast auxiliary stations as described
in paragraph (g) of this section. The band segment 6425-6525 MHz is
available for broadcast auxiliary stations as described in paragraph
(i) of this section. The bands 6875-7125 MHz and 12700-13200 MHz are
co-equally shared with stations licensed pursuant to parts 78 and 101
of this chapter. Broadcast network-entities may also use the 1990-2110,
6425-6525 and 6875-7125 MHz bands for mobile television pickup only. On
or after September 19, 2022, applications for new or modified stations
in the 12.7-13.25 GHz band under this part and parts 78 and 101 are
unacceptable for filing and shall be dismissed, except for applications
of eligible incumbent television pickup (TVPU) and cable television
relay service (CARS) pickup stations (collectively, mobile BAS/CARS)
licensees to modify incumbent authorizations to the repacked mobile
BAS/CARS sub-band.
* * * * *
\2\ The mobile BAS/CARS repack band(s) is reserved for mobile BAS/
CARS licensees that were licensed to operate in the 12.7-13.25 GHz band
pursuant to applications filed before September 19, 2022, that timely
certified such authorizations as required in accordance with the
procedures set-forth in GN Docket No. 22-352.
* * * * *
0
24. Amend Sec. 74.690 by revising the section heading and paragraphs
(a) through (d) and adding paragraph (f) to read as follows:
Sec. 74.690 Transition of the 1990-2025 MHz and 12,700-13,250 MHz
bands from the Broadcast Auxiliary Service to emerging technologies and
reimbursement and cost-sharing.
(a) New Entrants are collectively defined as those licensees
proposing to use emerging technologies to implement Mobile Satellite
Services in the 2000-2020 MHz band (MSS licensees), those licensees
authorized after July 1, 2004, to implement new Fixed and Mobile
services in the 1990-1995 MHz band, those licensees authorized after
September 9, 2004, in the 1995-2000 MHz and 2020-2025 MHz bands, and
those licensees authorized under part 27 of this chapter after
September 19, 2022, in the 12,700-13,250 MHz band. New entrants may
negotiate with Broadcast Auxiliary Service licensees operating on a
primary basis and fixed service licensees operating on a primary basis
in the 1990-2025 MHz band (Existing Licensees) for the purpose of
agreeing to terms under which the Existing Licensees would relocate
their operations to the 2025-2110 MHz band, to other authorized bands,
or to other media; or, alternatively, would discontinue use of the
1990-2025 MHz band. New licensees in the 1995-2000 MHz and 2020-2025
MHz bands are subject to the specific relocation procedures adopted in
WT Docket 04-356. New Entrants in the 12,700-13,250 MHz band are
subject to the specific relocation procedures adopted in GN Docket No.
22-352. New Entrants may negotiate with Broadcast Auxiliary Service
(BAS) licensees operating on a primary basis and fixed service
licensees operating on a primary basis in the 12,700-13,250 MHz band
(Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees) for the purpose of agreeing to terms
under which the Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees in the 12,700-13,250 MHz
band would relocate their authorized operation, if timely certified as
required in accordance with the procedures set-forth in GN Docket No.
22-352, or discontinue use of the 12,700-13,250 MHz band.
(b) An Existing Licensee and Existing 12.7 GHz Licensee will
maintain primary status in the band until the operations of the
Existing Licensee or Existing 12.7 GHz Licensee are relocated by a New
Entrant, are discontinued under the terms of paragraph (a) of this
section, or become secondary under the terms of paragraph (e)(6) or
(f)(6) of this section or the Existing Licensee or Existing 12.7 GHz
Licensee indicates to a New Entrant that it declines to be relocated.
(c) The Commission will amend the operating license of the Existing
Licensee or Existing 12.7 GHz Licensee, other than the mobile
operations of an Existing 12.7 GHz Licensee that has been transitioned
to the repack band, to secondary status only if the following
requirements are met:
(1) The service applicant, provider, licensee, or representative
using an emerging technology guarantees payment of all relocation
costs, including all engineering, equipment, site and FCC fees, as well
as any reasonable additional costs that the
[[Page 43972]]
relocated Existing Licensee or Existing 12.7 GHz Licensee might incur
as a result of operation in another authorized band or migration to
another medium;
(2) The New Entrant completes all activities necessary for
implementing the replacement facilities, including engineering and cost
analysis of the relocation procedure and, if radio facilities are used,
identifying and obtaining, on the incumbents' behalf, new microwave or
Local Television Transmission Service frequencies and frequency
coordination.
(3) The New Entrant builds the replacement system and tests it for
comparability with the existing system.
(d) The Existing Licensee or Existing 12.7 GHz Licensee is not
required to relocate until the alternative facilities are available to
it for a reasonable time to make adjustments, determine comparability,
and ensure a seamless handoff. If, within one year after the relocation
to new facilities the Existing Licensee or Existing 12.7 GHz Licensee
demonstrates that the new facilities are not comparable to the former
facilities, the New Entrant must remedy the defects.
* * * * *
(f) Subject to the terms of this paragraph (f), the relocation of
Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees will be carried out by New Entrants in the
following manner:
(1) Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees and New Entrants may negotiate
individually or collectively for relocation of Existing 12.7 GHz
Licensees to comparable facilities, as that term is used in Sec.
101.73 of this chapter. Parties may not decline to negotiate, though
Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees may decline to be relocated.
(i) New Entrants are required to relocate the fixed microwave links
of Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees prior to commencing operations if
interference would occur. A New Entrant must conform to the technical
criteria specified in TIA Bulletin TSB 10-F, or procedures other than
TSB 10-F that follow generally acceptable good engineering practices
pursuant to Sec. 101.105(c) of this chapter, to determine if
interference would occur such that their relocation would be necessary
before a New Entrant's operations could commence.
(ii) New Entrants must relocate the non-fixed and mobile operations
of all Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees on a market-by-market basis in a
Nielsen Designated Market Areas (DMA), as such DMAs existed on
September 19, 2022, in which it seeks to provide service prior to
commencing operations, except those Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees that
decline relocation.
(iii) Such relocation negotiations shall be conducted as
``mandatory negotiations,'' as that term is used in Sec. 101.73 of
this chapter. If these parties are unable to reach a negotiated
agreement prior to the expiration of the mandatory negotiation period,
New Entrants may involuntarily relocate such Existing 12.7 GHz
Licensees in accordance with procedures set-forth in Sec. 101.75 of
this chapter.
(iv) After the end of the mandatory negotiation period, a New
Entrant may involuntary relocate any Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees with
which they have been unable to reach a negotiated agreement.
(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (f)(1) of this section, the non-fixed
and mobile operations of Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees' operations in an
adjacent market may need to be relocated even though the New Entrant
does not initiate operations in that adjacent market. A New Entrant
undertaking clearing would be obligated to relocate all incumbent non-
fixed and mobile operations of Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees in all
affected markets, including those markets where the New Entrant
provides partial, minimal, or even no service. A New Entrant must
conform to the technical criteria specified in TIA Bulletin TSB 10-F,
or procedures other than TSB 10-F that follow generally acceptable good
engineering practices pursuant to Sec. 101.105(c) of this chapter, to
determine any additional market(s) where a New Entrant would cause
interference to the non-fixed and mobile operations of Existing 12.7
GHz Licensees, such that their relocation would be necessary before a
New Entrant commences operations.
(3) The obligations of a New Entrant to relocate an Existing 12.7
GHz Licensee will terminate on the sunset date for Existing 12.7 GHz
Licensee to retain primary operations in the band. On this date, all
Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees will become secondary in the 12.7-13.25 GHz
band with the exception of mobile BAS relocated to the repacked band.
Upon written demand by a New Entrant that intends to commence
operations in the 12.7-13.25 GHz band, Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees that
have not been relocated to the repacked band must cease operations in
the 12.7-13.25 GHz band within six months.
(4) The cost-sharing obligations of New Entrants for the relocation
of the fixed microwave links of Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees is governed
by Sec. Sec. 27.1760 through 27.1767 of this chapter. The cost-sharing
obligations of New Entrants for the relocation of non-fixed and mobile
operations of Existing 12.7 GHz Licensee is governed by this paragraph
(f)(4). All New Entrants to the 12.7-13.25 GHz band are required to
bear a proportional share of the costs incurred in the relocation of
the non-fixed or mobile operations of an Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees,
on a pro rata basis according to the amount of spectrum each licensee
is assigned relative to the amount of 12.7 GHz spectrum that has been
licensed. New Entrants that incur relocation costs may seek
reimbursement for compensable costs from other New Entrants that have
been licensed to provide service in a relocated market prior to the
sunset date, i.e., the date on which the relocation obligation
terminates. New Entrants that are licensed prior to the sunset date
must satisfy their reimbursement obligations for relocated markets in
full. Because a New Entrant may be required to relocate the non-fixed
and mobile operations of Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees in adjacent
markets pursuant to paragraph (f)(2) of this section, the New Entrant
may seek full reimbursement of compensable costs for the relocation of
an adjacent market from New Entrants that have been licensed to provide
service in the adjacent market. Reimbursement of compensable costs for
a relocated market is not subject to depreciation. Compensable costs
are limited to the actual costs of relocation and based on the
definition set-forth in Sec. 27.1762(b) of this chapter, as adjusted
to reflect mobile operations of Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees. New
Entrants must maintain and, as requested, share documentation of
relocation costs consistent with Sec. 27.1763(b) of this chapter, as
modified to reflect mobile operations of Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees.
New entrants are expected to act in good faith in satisfying the cost-
sharing obligations. Parties are encouraged to use expedited
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) procedures, such as binding
arbitration, mediation, or other ADR techniques to resolve disputes
arising out of reimbursement and cost-sharing, such as disputes over
the amount of reimbursement required. Parties of interest contesting
cost-sharing obligations must provide evidentiary support to
demonstrate that their calculation is reasonable and made in good
faith. Specifically, these parties are expected to exercise due
diligence to obtain the information necessary to prepare an independent
estimate of the relocation costs in question and to file the
independent estimate and
[[Page 43973]]
supporting documentation with other affected parties and, if necessary,
with the Commission.
PART 78--CABLE TELEVISION RELAY SERVICE
0
25. The authority citation for part 78 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 4 7 U.S.C. 152, 153, 154, 301, 303, 307, 308, 309.
0
26. Amend Sec. 78.18 by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (b); and
0
b. Removing paragraph (m).
The revision reads as follows:
Sec. 78.18 Frequency assignments.
* * * * *
(b) On or after September 19, 2022, applications for new or
modified stations in the 12.7-13.25 GHz band under this part and parts
74 and 101 of this chapter are unacceptable for filing and shall be
dismissed, except for applications of eligible incumbent Television
pickup (TVPU) and cable television relay service (CARS) pickup stations
(collectively, mobile BAS/CARS) to modify incumbent authorizations to
the repacked mobile BAS/CARS sub-band. The mobile BAS/CARS repack
band(s) is reserved for eligible incumbent that were licensed to
operate in the 12.7-13.25 GHz band pursuant to applications filed
before September 19, 2022.
* * * * *
0
27. Amend Sec. 78.40 by revising the section heading and paragraphs
(a) through (e) and adding paragraph (g) to read as follows:
Sec. 78.40 Transition of the 1990-2025 MHz and 12,700-13,250 MHz
bands from the Cable Television Relay Service to emerging technologies
and reimbursement and cost-sharing in the 12,700-13,250 MHz band.
(a) New Entrants are collectively defined as those licensees
proposing to use emerging technologies to implement Mobile Satellite
Services in the 2000-2020 MHz band (MSS licensees), those licensees
authorized after July 1, 2004, to implement new Fixed and Mobile
services in the 1990-1995 MHz band, those licensees authorized after
September 9, 2004, in the 1995-2000 MHz and 2020-2025 MHz bands, and
those licensees authorized after September 19, 2022, in the 12,700-
13,250 MHz band. New entrants may negotiate with Cable Television Relay
Service licensees operating on a primary basis and fixed service
licensees operating on a primary basis in the 1990-2025 MHz band
(Existing Licensees) for the purpose of agreeing to terms under which
the Existing Licensees would relocate their operations to the 2025-2110
MHz band, to other authorized bands, or to other media; or,
alternatively, would accept a sharing arrangement with the New Entrants
that may result in an otherwise impermissible level of interference to
the Existing Licensee's operations. New licensees in the 1995-2000 MHz
and 2020-2025 MHz bands are subject to the specific relocation
procedures adopted in WT Docket 04-356. New Entrants in the 12,700-
13,250 MHz band are subject to the specific relocation procedures
adopted in GN Docket No. 22-352. New entrants may negotiate with Cable
Television Relay Service licensees operating on a primary basis and
fixed service licensees operating on a primary basis in the 12,700-
13,250 MHz bands (Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees) for the purpose of
agreeing to terms under which the Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees in the
12,700-13,250 MHz band would relocate their operations to the repacked
band, to other authorized bands, or to other media; or, alternatively,
would accept a sharing arrangement with the New Entrants that may
result in an otherwise impermissible level of interference to the
Existing 12.7 GHz Licensee's operations in the 12,700-13,250 MHz band.
(b) An Existing Licensee and Existing 12.7 GHz Licensee will
maintain primary status in the band until the operations of the
Existing Licensee or Existing 12.7 GHz Licensee are relocated by a New
Entrant, or become secondary under the terms of paragraph (g)(3) of
this section or the Existing Licensee or Existing 12.7 GHz Licensee
indicates to a New Entrant that it declines to be relocated.
(c) The Commission will amend the operating license of the Existing
Licensee or Existing 12.7 GHz Licensee to secondary status only if the
following requirements are met:
(1) The service applicant, provider, licensee, or representative
using an emerging technology guarantees payment of all relocation
costs, including all engineering, equipment, site and FCC fees, as well
as any reasonable additional costs that the relocated Existing Licensee
or Existing 12.7 GHz Licensee might incur as a result of operation in
another authorized band or migration to another medium.
(2) The New Entrant completes all activities necessary for
implementing the replacement facilities, including engineering and cost
analysis of the relocation procedure and, if radio facilities are used,
identifying and obtaining, on the incumbents' behalf, new microwave or
Cable Television Relay Service frequencies and frequency coordination.
(3) The New Entrant builds the replacement system and tests it for
comparability with the existing system.
(d) The Existing Licensee or Existing 12.7 GHz Licensee is not
required to relocate until the alternative facilities are available to
it for a reasonable time to make adjustments, determine comparability,
and ensure a seamless handoff.
(e) If, within one year after the relocation to new facilities the
Existing Licensee or Existing 12.7 GHz demonstrates that the new
facilities are not comparable to the former facilities, the New Entrant
must remedy the defect.
* * * * *
(g) Subject to the terms of this paragraph (g), the relocation of
Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees will be carried out by New Entrants in the
following manner:
(1) Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees and New Entrants may negotiate
individually or collectively for relocation of Existing 12.7 GHz
Licensees to comparable facilities, as that term is used in Sec.
101.73 of this chapter. Parties may not decline to negotiate, though
Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees may decline to be relocated.
(i) New Entrants are required to relocate the fixed microwave links
of Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees prior to commencing operations if
interference would occur. A New Entrant must conform to the technical
criteria specified in TIA Bulletin TSB 10-F, or procedures other than
TSB 10-F that follow generally acceptable good engineering practices
pursuant to Sec. 101.105(c) of this chapter, to determine if
interference would occur such that their relocation would be necessary
before a New Entrant's operations could commence.
(ii) New Entrants must relocate all non-fixed and mobile operations
of Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees on a market-by-market basis in a Nielsen
Designated Market Areas (DMA), as such DMAs existed on September 19,
2022, where it seeks to provide service prior to commencing operations,
except those Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees that decline relocation.
(iii) Relocation negotiations shall be conducted as ``mandatory
negotiations,'' as that term is used in Sec. 101.73 of this chapter.
If these parties are unable to reach a negotiated agreement prior to
the expiration of the mandatory negotiation period, New Entrants may
involuntarily relocate such Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees in accordance
with procedures set forth in Sec. 101.75 of this chapter.
[[Page 43974]]
(iv) After the end of the mandatory negotiation period, a New
Entrant may involuntary relocate any Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees with
which they have been unable to reach a negotiated agreement.
(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (g)(1) of this section, the non-fixed
and mobile operations of Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees' operations in an
adjacent market may need to be relocated even though the New Entrant
does not initiate operations in that adjacent market. A New Entrant
undertaking clearing would be obligated to relocate all incumbent non-
fixed and mobile operations of Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees in all
affected markets, including those markets where the New Entrant
provides partial, minimal, or even no service. A New Entrant must
conform to the technical criteria specified in TIA Bulletin TSB 10-F,
or procedures other than TSB 10-F that follow generally acceptable good
engineering practices pursuant to Sec. 101.105(c) of this chapter, to
determine any additional market(s) where a New Entrant would cause
interference to the non-fixed and mobile operations of Existing 12.7
GHz Licensees, such that their relocation would be necessary before a
New Entrant commences operations.
(3) The obligations of a New Entrant to relocate an Existing 12.7
GHz Licensee will terminate on the sunset date for Existing 12.7 GHz
Licensee to retain primary operations in the band. On this date, all
Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees will become secondary in the 12.7-13.25 GHz
band with the exception of those relocated to the repacked band. Upon
written demand by a New Entrant that intends to commence operations in
the 12.7-13.25 GHz band, Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees that have not been
relocated to the repacked band must cease operations in the 12.7-13.25
GHz band within six months.
(4) The cost-sharing obligations of New Entrants for the relocation
of the fixed microwave links of Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees is governed
by Sec. Sec. 27.1760 through 27.1767 of this chapter. The cost-sharing
obligations of New Entrants for the relocation of non-fixed and mobile
operations of Existing 12.7 GHz Licensee is governed by this paragraph
(g)(4). All New Entrants to the 12.7-13.25 GHz band are required to
bear a proportional share of the costs incurred in the relocation of
the non-fixed or mobile operations of an Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees,
on a pro rata basis according to the amount of spectrum each licensee
is assigned relative to the amount of 12.7 GHz spectrum that has been
licensed. New Entrants that incur relocation costs may seek
reimbursement for compensable costs from other New Entrants that have
been licensed to provide service in a relocated market prior to the
sunset date, i.e., the date on which the relocation obligation
terminates. New Entrants that are licensed prior to the sunset date
must satisfy their reimbursement obligations for relocated markets in
full. Because a New Entrant may be required to relocate the non-fixed
and mobile operations of Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees in adjacent
markets pursuant to paragraph (g)(2) of this section, the New Entrant
may seek full reimbursement of compensable costs for the relocation of
an adjacent market from New Entrants that have been licensed to provide
service in the adjacent market. Reimbursement of compensable costs for
a relocated market is not subject to depreciation. Compensable costs
are limited to the actual costs of relocation and based on the
definition set forth in Sec. 27.1762(b) of this chapter, as adjusted
to reflect mobile operations of Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees. New
Entrants must maintain and, as requested, share documentation of
relocation costs consistent with Sec. 27.1763(b) of this chapter, as
modified to reflect mobile operations of Existing 12.7 GHz Licensees.
New entrants are expected to act in good faith in satisfying the cost-
sharing obligations. Parties are encouraged to use expedited
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) procedures, such as binding
arbitration, mediation, or other ADR techniques to resolve disputes
arising out of reimbursement and cost-sharing, such as disputes over
the amount of reimbursement required. Parties of interest contesting
cost-sharing obligations must provide evidentiary support to
demonstrate that their calculation is reasonable and made in good
faith. Specifically, these parties are expected to exercise due
diligence to obtain the information necessary to prepare an independent
estimate of the relocation costs in question and to file the
independent estimate and supporting documentation with other affected
parties and, if necessary, with the Commission.
PART 101--FIXED MICROWAVE SERVICES
0
28. The authority citation for part 101 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303.
0
29. Revise the undesignated center heading immediately preceding Sec.
101.69 to read as follows:
Policies Governing Microwave Relocation From the 1850-1990, 2110-2200,
and 12,700-13,250 MHz Bands
0
30. Amend Sec. 101.69 by revising the introductory text, paragraph (a)
introductory text, and the first sentence of paragraph (d) introductory
text to read as follows:
Sec. 101.69 Transition of the 1850-1990 MHz, 2110-2150 MHz, 2160-
2200, and 12,700-13,250 MHz bands from the fixed microwave services to
personal communications services and emerging technologies.
Fixed Microwave Services (FMS) in the 1850-1990 MHz, 2110-2150 MHz,
2160-2200, and 12,700-13,250 MHz bands have been allocated for use by
emerging technology (ET) services, including Personal Communications
Services (PCS), Advanced Wireless Services (AWS), and Mobile Satellite
Services (MSS). The rules in this section provide for a transition
period during which ET licensees may relocate existing FMS licensees
using these frequencies to other media or other fixed channels,
including those in other microwave bands.
(a) ET licensees may negotiate with FMS licensees authorized to use
frequencies in the 1850-1990 MHz, 2110-2150 MHz, 2160-2200 MHz and
12,700-13,2500 MHz bands, for the purpose of agreeing to terms under
which the FMS licensees would:
* * * * *
(d) Relocation of FMS licensees in the 2110-2150, 2160-2200, and
12,700-13,250 MHz band will be subject to mandatory negotiations only.
* * *
* * * * *
0
31. Amend Sec. 101.73 by revising paragraph (a) and the paragraph (d)
heading to read as follows:
Sec. 101.73 Mandatory negotiations.
(a) A mandatory negotiation period may be initiated at the option
of the ET licensee. Relocation of FMS licensees by Mobile Satellite
Service (MSS) operators and AWS licensees in the 2110-2150 MHz and
2160-2200 MHz bands or ET licensee in the 12,700-13,250 MHz band will
be subject to mandatory negotiations only.
* * * * *
(d) Provisions for Relocation of Fixed Microwave Licensees in the
2110-2150, 2160-2200 MHz, and 12,700-13,250 MHz bands. * * *
* * * * *
0
32. Amend Sec. 101.79 by revising the section heading and paragraph
(a) introductory text and adding paragraph (a)(3) to read as follows:
[[Page 43975]]
Sec. 101.79 Sunset provisions for licensees in the 1850-1990 MHz,
2110-2150 MHz, 2160-2200 MHz, and 12,700-13,250 MHz bands.
(a) FMS licensees will maintain primary status in the 1850-1990
MHz, 2110-2150 MHz, 2160-2200 MHz, and 12,700-13,250 MHz bands unless
and until an ET licensee requires use of the spectrum. ET licensees are
not required to pay relocation costs after the relocation rules sunset.
Once the relocation rules sunset, an ET licensee may require the
incumbent to cease operations, provided that the ET licensee intends to
turn on a system within interference range of the incumbent, as
determined by TIA TSB 10-F (for terrestrial-to-terrestrial situations)
or TIA TSB 86 (for MSS satellite-to-terrestrial situations) or any
standard successor. ET licensee notification to the affected FMS
licensee must be in writing and must provide the incumbent with no less
than six months to vacate the spectrum. After the six-month notice
period has expired, the FMS licensee must turn its license back into
the Commission, unless the parties have entered into an agreement which
allows the FMS licensee to continue to operate on a mutually agreed
upon basis. The date that the relocation rules sunset is determined as
follows:
* * * * *
(3) For the 12,700-13,250 MHz band, the sunset date shall be three
years after the first ET license is issued in the band.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2023-13500 Filed 7-7-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P