Expanding Use of the 12.7-13.25 GHz Band for Mobile Broadband or Other Expanded Use, 43938-43975 [2023-13500]

Agencies

• FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[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: https://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