**APPENDIX F:**

**FIXED VOICE AND DATA SERVICES**

As Congress and the Commission have looked for new ways to promote
competition in the telecommunications industry, it has become clear that
wireless licensees providing fixed wireless services have the potential
to create facilities-based competition in numerous industries beyond the
traditional mobile markets. While spectrum classified as CMRS is being
utilized in this manner,[^1] non-CMRS spectrum, including Multipoint
Multichannel Distribution Service (\"MMDS\"), 3.5 GHz, Digital
Electronic Message Service (\"DEMS\"), Local Multipoint Distribution
Service (\"LMDS\"), and 39 GHz, are also being used.

In this section, the Commission reviews the state of competition
provided by fixed wireless operators for voice and data services in both
residential and business markets. For discussion purposes, the operators
are trifurcated by spectrum bands - cellular/broadband PCS, 2 GHz to 4
GHz, and Upperband spectrum. The Commission also examines some of the
challenges these operators face, as well as some of their strengths.

A. Fixed Wireless Access

In a fixed wireless access system, a provider attaches a radio
transmitter to a customer\'s premises that communicates with a central
antenna site. This antenna site acts as the gateway into the PSTN or the
Internet. This technology functions as a replacement for the \"last
mile\" of copper wire that has traditionally provided individual
customers with telecommunications services, thus allowing a wireless
provider to compete with a traditional wireline service provider. The
\"last mile\" is also referred to as the \"local loop;\" thus, fixed
wireless access is often referred to as \"Wireless Local Loop\" or
\"WLL\" for short.[^2]

B. Service Providers

1\. Cellular (800 MHz) / Broadband PCS (1900 MHz)

One analyst predicts that, worldwide, WLL systems using
cellular/broadband PCS spectrum will have the greatest number of WLL
subscribers in the future, growing from an estimated 5.8 million in 2001
to 22 million in 2005.[^3] In the United States, the current WLL in
these bands is still in an early stage of development, is currently
targeted at low-use/residential subscribers, and is secondary to the
mobile products of service providers.

[Centennial Cellular Corp. (\"Centennial\")]{.underline} - Centennial
has been operating a WLL system in Puerto Rico since 1997 using its
broadband PCS spectrum.[^4] Centennial offers both mobile and fixed
services from the same platform. Centennial was serving 14,200
\"HomePhone\" customers as of November 30, 1998.[^5] The HomePhone unit
looks and functions like a conventional telephone and supports call
waiting, conference calling, call transfer, voice mail, one‑touch
redial, and other features.[^6] HomePhone service costs \$29.95 per
month for 250 off-peak minutes and 30 peak minutes.[^7] This rate is for
fixed use only: subscribers incur additional charges if they use the
phone as a mobile unit.[^8] The phone can either be leased or
purchased.[^9] All calls within Puerto Rico are local and incoming calls
are free.[^10]

[Western Wireless Co.(\"WWC\")]{.underline} - WWC is operating fixed
wireless systems in Nevada and North Dakota using its cellular licenses.
Under an agreement reached between Nevada Bell, the Nevada Public
Service Commission, and WWC to expand basic telephone service to a
previously unserved region, WWC provides dialtone service to two small
rural communities, Antelope Valley and Reece, using its cellular
infrastructure.[^11] Operating basically as a subcontractor to Nevada
Bell, WWC provides service at the regular tariffed wireline local rate
to the 50 residents of the region.[^12] Users connect to the PSTN by way
of a laptop-sized unit provided by WWC. The unit is basically a cellular
phone with a phone jack.[^13]

In the small town of Regent, North Dakota, WWC set up a similar network,
but as a CLEC and without support from the state.[^14] Inaugurated on
January 7, 1999,[^15] it was turned off four days later by Consolidated
Telephone Cooperative (\"CTC\"), the ILEC for the area.[^16] CTC,
through which WWC connected to the PSTN, disconnected WWC\'s customers,
claiming that WWC\'s interconnection agreement permitted \"cellular
calls and not . . . competitive local exchange service.\"[^17] After a
phone conference with the North Dakota Public Service Commission and the
Federal Communications Commission, CTC agreed to reconnect WWC\'s
customers.[^18] As of February 8, 1999, WWC had signed up 40 customers,
20 percent of the town\'s 268 residents.[^19] WWC\'s fixed local loop
service is priced at \$14.99 per month versus \$16.00 for CTC[^20] and
the local calling area includes 15 communities versus two communities
for CTC.[^21]

[AT&T]{.underline} - In February 1997, AT&T announced the development of
a \"revolutionary fixed wireless technology,\" code-named \"Project
Angel.\"[^22] The system, operating on AT&T\'s broadband PCS spectrum,
was to provide subscriber households with two phone lines and the
capability for high‑speed Internet access at 128 kbps.[^23] After
running field trials of the system in Chicago in late 1997,[^24] AT&T
put the project on hold, reportedly because of concern over high
implementation costs.[^25] In February 1999, AT&T announced that it
would resume tests of Project Angel.[^26] In May, the company began
offering free fixed wireless service in Dallas a part of its testing of
the system.[^27] AT&T plans to introduce local commercial voice and data
services in select cities by 2000.[^28]

2\. 2 GHz to 4 GHz

Commercial and trial services in these bands, primarily by wireless
cable licensees, target both business and residential customers.

a\. Wireless Cable

MMDS licensees, also referred to as \"wireless cable\" operators,[^29]
originally purchased licenses in the 2 GHz spectrum band to provide
television programming to residential customers. However, many MMDS
operators found it difficult to compete with cable in this market due to
the high capital costs of building out wireless cable systems[^30] and
the lower channel capacities of MMDS relative to those of wireline cable
and direct-to-home satellite companies.[^31] These difficulties resulted
in low subscriber numbers and financial strain for several MMDS
companies.[^32] However, as an innovative business opportunity, many
wireless cable companies have begun to focus on offering high-speed
Internet access[^33] and telephony instead of television programming,
and have shown early success in these endeavors.[^34]

The Commission\'s September 1998 order authorizing wireless cable
operators to offer two-way services cleared the way for another major
competitor to enter the broadband services market.[^35] The
Commission\'s Order established a framework for allowing MMDS operators
to offer, quickly and easily, two-way high-speed Internet access
service, as well as other two-way services, such as telephony, video
conferencing, and distance learning.[^36] Prior to the Order, MMDS
operators sought waivers from the Commission to provide Internet access
and used a telephone line modem for the upstream connection.

In March 1999, Wireless One, Inc. (\"Wireless One\") and Heartland
Wireless Systems, Inc. (which changed its name to Nucentrix on April 1,
1999) announced that they would emerge from bankruptcy with business
plans focused on offering high-speed Internet access mainly to small
businesses and home offices.[^37] The companies stated they would not
expand their video operations, but would continue operating their
existing systems through partnerships with direct-to-home satellite
companies.[^38] Later that month, MCI WorldCom invested \$200 million in
four wireless cable companies including Wireless One, CAI Wireless
Systems, Inc. (\"CAI Wireless\"), People\'s Choice TV Corp., and CS
Wireless Systems, Inc.[^39] Industry observers speculated that the
investment would become a core part of MCI WorldCom\'s strategy for
offering high-speed Internet access to consumers.[^40] In April 1999,
MCI WorldCom acquired the remaining equity of CAI Wireless. During that
same month, Sprint acquired People\'s Choice TV Corp. and American
Telecasting.[^41] Almost all MMDS operators have stated that they plan
to offer more data and telephony services in 1999.[^42]

In addition to the traditional wireless cable operators, there are
several wireless cable licensees who were not previously video
programming distributors, but instead provide Internet access. These
entities tend to be start-up companies using MMDS or low-power
television licenses. For example, IJNT International (formerly
InterJetNet, Inc.) was founded in 1997 and now offers wireless Internet
access in six cities.[^43] SkyLynx Communications, Inc., operating at
2.4 GHz, was formed in 1996 and offers two-way, high-speed, advanced
data services in Florida and California.[^44] The company is focusing on
small to medium sized businesses and Multiple Dwelling Units, such as
apartment buildings and condominiums, in second-tier cities.[^45]

b\. Other Providers

[CFW Communications (\"CFW\")]{.underline}- CFW conducted a wireless
local loop trial in 1998 using its MMDS spectrum. It was able to
broadcast from a central cell site to terminals up to 30 miles away and
obtained two-way voice capabilities with the quality of a landline
connection. CFW is considering building a WLL for commercial
purposes.[^46]

[Salt River Pima-Maricopa Reservation]{.underline} - On December 11,
1998, Arizona Senator McCain placed the inaugural call on an
experimental fixed wireless system located on the Salt River
Pima-Maricopa Reservation, a 56,000‑acre Indian reservation near
Scottsdale, AZ.[^47] The system, using Nortel\'s \"Proximity I\" Fixed
Wireless Access technology, operates at 3.5 GHz and connects to users
through a pizza-sized dish.[^48] Attached to the exterior of a building,
the dish receives signals from a central 163‑foot tall transmitter.[^49]
The new system has been installed in about 100 homes on the reservation
of 6,000 people.[^50] Monthly service for the system costs about \$13
and long distance calls are 10 cents a minute.[^51] The service includes
call waiting, voice mail, and three‑way calling.[^52] Antenna
installation costs \$60 and takes about two hours.[^53]

3.Number range level3 Upperbands (24 to 39 GHz)

The largest commercial deployment of fixed wireless systems has occurred
in the \"upperbands\" of the spectrum, in the 24 GHz (DEMS), 28 GHz
(LMDS), and 39 GHz ranges.[^54] The most significant operators in these
bands, Teligent, Inc. (\"Teligent\") and WinStar Communications, Inc.
(\"WinStar\"), are concentrating on business customers. However, the
recently auctioned LMDS spectrum may create more residential
services.[^55]

a\. 24 GHz (DEMS)

[Teligent]{.underline} - Teligent provides a bundle of broadband fixed
wireless telecom services to small and medium sized businesses using its
24 GHz licenses.[^56] Teligent has also made significant strides in its
business since the writing of the *Third Report*. As of June 1999, the
company had entered 28 markets covering 83 million people and plans to
enter 12 additional markets by the end of 1999.[^57] Teligent\'s
licenses cover 74 markets nationwide and the company plans to enter all
these markets by the end of 2001.[^58] By the end of 1998, the company
had secured access rights to nearly 2,400 buildings and had installed 13
Nortel DMS switches.[^59]

b\. 28 GHz (LMDS)

A Local Multipoint Distribution Service system is capable of offering
subscribers a variety of one- and two-way broadband services, such as
video programming distribution, video teleconferencing, and wireless
local loop telephony, as well as Internet access and other high speed
data transmission services. Because of its multi-purpose applications,
LMDS has the potential to become a major competitor to local exchange
carriers and cable television providers, although it appears that LMDS
operators plan to concentrate on voice and data services.[^60] There is
currently only one operational, commercial LMDS provider: SPEEDUS.COM,
Inc. (formerly Cellularvision USA). SPEEDUS.COM offers high-speed
Internet access, up to 48 Mbps downstream, to business and residential
users in Manhattan, Brooklyn, and Queens, NY.

The Commission completed an LMDS auction in March 1998.[^61] LMDS
licensees plan to offer a mix of the fixed wireless services mentioned
above, especially high-speed Internet access and other data
services.[^62] While many are waiting for the technological standards
and specifications to be set and for the LMDS technology to mature,[^63]
some licensees have taken the first steps in building their networks.
Some have signed contracts with equipment manufacturers, run trials of
their networks, and/or have announced plans for service offerings.[^64]
Most of these licensees are either established telecommunications
companies that plan to expand their networks and enhance their service
offerings or business ventures of utility companies that want to bring
advanced services to rural areas not served by fiber. In October 1998,
nine percent of LMDS licensees stated they planned to deploy their
networks within a year and 50 percent plan to offer services in the next
three to five years.[^65] LMDS operators are expected to offer their
services mainly to small and medium sized businesses.[^66] Analysts
predict that nine percent of broadband users will access the Internet
via LMDS in 2003[^67] and that LMDS revenues will total \$241 million in
1999 and over \$6 billion by 2007.[^68] The Commission has scheduled an
auction of additional LMDS licenses for April 27, 1999.[^69]

In one of the major developments since the close of the first LMDS
auction, Nextlink Communications, Inc. (\"Nextlink\") a CLEC currently
operating 25 fiber networks in 15 states and the District of
Columbia,[^70] announced two major acquisitions. In January 1999,
Nextlink announced its acquisition of WNP Communications, Inc. (\"WNP\")
and completed the acquisition in April 1999.[^71] WNP was the largest
bidder in the LMDS auction, having acquired 40 licenses covering 114
million POPs. In addition, Nextlink announced an agreement with Nextel
to purchase Nextel\'s interest in LMDS licensee Nextband Communications,
LLC (\"Nextband\"). Nextlink and Nextel each own 50 percent of Nextband,
which purchased 42 licenses in the LMDS auction. This aquisition will
make Nextlink the sole owner of Nextband. When the two deals are
completed, Nextlink will own spectrum covering all of the top 30 U.S.
markets, most of which it plans to enter by the end of 1999.[^72] The
company plans to use the spectrum as a complement to its fiber
networks.[^73] In June 1999, Nextlink also purchased two million shares
of SPEEDUS.COM, Inc.[^74]

c\. 39 GHz

[WinStar]{.underline} - WinStar uses its 28 GHz and 39 GHz licenses to
provide a package of WLL services, which it collectively calls
\"Wireless Fiber.\" WinStar sells local, long distance, high speed data,
Internet access, and information services to business customers and
resells its networks to other telecommunications carriers.[^75] WinStar
has grown significantly since the writing of the *Third Report*. The
company now offers wireless CLEC services in the top 30 markets in the
United States[^76] and had 380,000 lines in service as of March 31,
1999.[^77] WinStar plans to compete in 40 markets by the end of 1999 and
states that it has the financial capabilities to enter 50 cities in the
U.S. and another 50 around the world.[^78]

WinStar adopted a strategy of not only connecting individual businesses
but entire buildings to its network by contracting with owners of
corporate real estate. WinStar had obtained access rights to more than
4,800 commercial buildings nationwide by March 1999[^79] and has plans
to obtain access to a total of 8,000 buildings by the end of 1999. These
access rights enable WinStar to provide a building's tenants with a wide
range of telecommunications services.[^80]

[Advanced Radio Telecom, Inc. (\"ART\")]{.underline} - ART uses its 39
GHz licenses, as well as frame relay and ATM technology, to offer
high-speed Internet access and other Internet services.[^81] ART began
offering these services to business customers in Seattle, WA in
September 1998, and in Portland, OR and Phoenix, AZ in December
1998.[^82] At the end of 1998, ART had access to 155 buildings, offered
full network connectivity to 85 buildings, and had received 142 customer
orders. In June 1999, Qwest Communications International Inc. purchased
a 19 percent stake in ART. ART claims the investment will help the
company fulfill its goal of building broadband wireless high-speed
networks in 40 of the top 50 metropolitan areas over the next two years.
ART plans to provide a full array of communications services including
Internet access, Internet services, data transmission, fax, video
conferencing, electronic commerce, and voice over IP.[^83] ART has
stated that its spectrum licenses combined with Qwest\'s 18,500-mile
fiber network will allow ART to reach more than 50 percent of U.S.
businesses.[^84]

ART's nationwide 38 GHz licenses cover 49 of the top 50 and 90 of the
top 100 U.S. markets. In total, the licenses cover 210 markets with a
population of over 186 million.[^85] In June 1998, ART purchased 23
additional 39 GHz licenses from Columbia Capital Corp. that cover 22
million POPs in 13 markets.[^86]

[AT&T]{.underline} **-** Although AT&T owns 39 GHz licenses, there is
little public information concerning how the company is using them.[^87]
AT&T obtained the licenses through its acquisition of Teleport
Communications Group, Inc. (\"TCG\"), completed in July 1998.[^88] At
that time, TCG, now AT&T\'s business local services unit,[^89] was the
largest fiber-based CLEC in the United States and had obtained the
licenses through its acquisition of Biztel Communications, Inc. in 1996.
TCG primarily used its digital, fiber optic networks to deliver
services, but would rely on its 39 GHz spectrum to connect customers to
its fiber networks, to provide temporary installation when its fiber
networks were down, and to provide stand-alone facilities where the
company did not have fiber networks.[^90] AT&T has said it plans to
expand TCG\'s wireless local loop bypass business.[^91]

C.Number range level2Number range level3 Competitive Analysis

1\. Strengths

In addition to providing new competition in existing markets, fixed
wireless systems have the potential to provide new services and expand
capacity into areas considered too expensive to enter using available
wireline technologies. WLLs afford new entrants in a market direct
access to an individual customer\'s building, limiting the reliance on
LECs.

*Lower Network Deployment Costs* - Fixed wireless operators claim that
their networks have a significantly lower cost structure than wireline
systems for two primary reasons.[^92] First, wireless networks are free
of the installation and maintenance costs incurred with wires. Second,
unlike a wireline network in which an entire market must be wired before
initiating service, the capital expenditures of a wireless network can
be incrementally incurred as more customers are added. Because of this
lower cost structure, operators have been able to charge significantly
lower prices than wireline competitors for business services. Teligent,
for example, offers its subscribers a flat monthly rate which is up to a
30 percent discount compared to wireline providers.[^93]

*High Capacity of Upperbands*- Upperband licensees have large blocks of
spectrum at their disposal, permitting high-capacity services, such as
video conferencing and super-high-speed Internet access. Winstar claims
to offer 200 Mbps speeds on its multipoint systems, 1500 times faster
than an ISDN line (128 Kbps).[^94] This capacity also permits providers
to offer packages of local, long-distance, and Internet services.

*Underserved Markets* - There are a number of market segments with low
penetration by existing broadband wireline systems. For example, only a
small percentage of office buildings have broadband access.[^95] Fixed
wireless operators can act as strategic partners with wireline CLECs who
wish to extend their fiber networks more cheaply to such buildings. Many
small and medium sized businesses, too low volume for expensive fiber
connections, are also potential customers.[^96] In addition, wireless
access has the potential to improve competition and broadband services
for residential customers in both urban and rural markets.[^97]

2\. Challenges

Along with the competitive advantages described above, fixed wireless
providers face a

number of challenges in establishing service. The challenges mentioned
below are in addition to those faced by all CLECs such as obtaining
interconnection agreements.[^98]

*Access Barrier Issues* - Fixed wireless providers have noted a number
of barriers to access to customers\' premises. Such barriers include
roof rights as well as related inside building facilities and inside
wiring. Fixed wireless providers need rooftop access on apartment and
office buildings to place their transmitting and receiving antennas.
Providers also need access to inside conduits and physical pathways from
the building owner. In addition, providers require access to the
building\'s inside wiring and riser cables to connect to the customer\'s
telephone system.

Obtaining access can represent a long and tedious process, as individual
contracts must be negotiated. Moreover, WinStar, Teligent, and others
have claimed that certain building owners and managers have started to
charge excessive fees, not based on a reasonable cost for access to roof
and inside facilities, but as an opportunity to gather revenues. Such
prices are discriminatory, they claim, as established incumbent LECs and
cable providers are not asked to pay such fees.[^99]

*State and Local Government Right-of-Way Requirements* - Certain state
and local governments have started to assess right-of-way franchise
requirements and right-of-way fees on broadband fixed wireless
licensees.[^100] Wireless carriers argue that because they do not use
the public rights-of-way, they should be exempt from franchise
requirements.[^101] WinStar believes the effect of such actions will
delay and possibly prohibit the provision of competitive local exchange
service by new wireless entrants.

*Universal Service Funding* - Wireline local exchange carriers offer
residential service discounted by the receipt of universal service
funds. In order to receive funding, a fixed wireless operator, like all
carriers, has to be designated an \"Eligible Telecommunications
Carrier\" (\"ETC\") by the state in which it plans to operate.[^102]
Some wireless providers consider some of these state rules as
discriminating unfairly against them.[^103]

*Technical Issues* - The propagation and technical characteristics of
upperband frequencies present two major challenges. First, high
frequency signals behave much more like visible light than cellular or
PCS signals when obstacles such as terrain, buildings, and vegetation
are encountered. These signals require line-of-sight between transmitter
and receiver in order for a prospective customer to receive an adequate
signal. To increase coverage, operators must increase the height of cell
antennas or move cells closer together. Second, high frequency signals
are easily scattered and absorbed by rain. An afternoon thunderburst,
for example, can significantly reduce the effective range of an
upperband system. Raising transmitter power output during these events
helps reduce signal fading.

**TABLE 1: INTERNET ACCESS OFFERINGS BY MMDS LICENSEES**

+-----------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+
| **Wireless      |                |                |                  |
| Cable           |                |                |                  |
| Operators**     |                |                |                  |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+
| **Company**     | **Location**   | **Launch       | **Downstream     |
|                 |                | Date**         | Speed**          |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+
| American        | Colorado       | Sep. 1997      | 750 kbps         |
| Telecasting     | Springs, CO    |                | downstream,      |
| (acquired by    |                | Feb. 1998      | telephone return |
| Sprint)         | Denver, CO;    |                | path             |
|                 | Portland, OR   | Trial          |                  |
|                 |                | Demonstration  | 750 kbps         |
|                 | Eugene, OR;    | 1998           | downstream,      |
|                 | Seattle, WA    |                | telephone return |
|                 |                |                | path             |
|                 |                |                |                  |
|                 |                |                | Two-way          |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+
| CAI Wireless    | Washington, DC | N/A            | Up to 27 Mbps    |
| Systems, Inc.   |                |                | downstream,      |
| (acquired by    |                |                | telephone return |
| MCI WorldCom)   |                |                | path             |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+
| CFW             | Ch             | Sep. 1997      | Up to 27 Mbps    |
| Communications  | arlottesville, |                | downstream,      |
|                 | VA             |                | telephone return |
|                 |                |                | path             |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+
| CS Wireless     | Dallas/Fort    | Nov. 1997      | Up to 4 Mbps     |
| Systems, Inc.   | Worth, TX      |                | downstream;      |
|                 |                |                | telephone, ISDN, |
|                 |                |                | or T-1 return    |
|                 |                |                | path             |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+
| Nucentrix       | Sherman, TX    | Jun. 1998      | 768 kbps (one    |
| (formerly       |                |                | and two-way)     |
| Heartland       |                |                |                  |
| Wireless        |                |                |                  |
| Systems, Inc.)  |                |                |                  |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+
| MagnaVision     | New York, NY   | Successful     | 1.5 Mbps or      |
| Corp.           |                | 6-month trial  | greater          |
|                 |                | completed      | downstream       |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+
| People\'s       | Detroit, MI    | Oct. 1997      | Up to 36 Mbps    |
| Choice TV Corp. |                |                | downstream,      |
| (acquired by    | Phoenix, AZ    | Mar. 1998      | telephone or     |
| Sprint)         |                |                | ISDN return path |
|                 |                |                |                  |
|                 |                |                | Same             |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+
| Sioux Valley    | Sioux Falls,   | Dec. 1997      | Up to 10 Mbps    |
| Wireless        | SD             |                | downstream,      |
|                 |                |                | telephone or     |
|                 |                |                | ISDN return path |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+
| Wireless One,   | Jackson, MS    | 1998           | MDS spectrum     |
| Inc.            |                |                | downstream, WCS  |
|                 | Baton Rouge,   | 1998           | return path      |
|                 | LA             |                |                  |
|                 |                | Dec. 1998      | Same             |
|                 | Memphis, TN    |                |                  |
|                 |                |                | Same             |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+

+-----------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+
| **Other         |                |                |                  |
| Providers**     |                |                |                  |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+
| **Company**     | **Location**   | **Launch       | **Downstream     |
|                 |                | Date**         | Speed**          |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+
| Cache Valley    | Cache Valley,  | N/A            | Up to 10 Mbps    |
| AIRNET          | UT             |                | downstream,      |
|                 |                |                | telephone or     |
|                 |                |                | ISDN return path |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+
| DirectNet       | South Florida  | Aug. 1997      | 1-2 Mbps         |
|                 |                |                | downstream,      |
|                 |                |                | telephone return |
|                 |                |                | path             |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+
| IJNT            | Salt Lake      | Aug. 1997      | Up to 10 Mbps    |
| International   | City, UT       |                | (one and         |
| (formerly       |                | Sep. 1997      | two-way)         |
| InterJetNet)    | Beaumont, TX   |                |                  |
|                 |                | N/A            | Same             |
|                 | Houston, TX    |                |                  |
|                 |                | Dec. 1998      | Same             |
|                 | Orange County, |                |                  |
|                 | CA             | Dec. 1998      | Same             |
|                 |                |                |                  |
|                 | San Francisco  | Apr. 1999      | Same             |
|                 | Bay Area, CA   |                |                  |
|                 |                |                | Same             |
|                 | Provo-Orem, UT |                |                  |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+
| Le Groupe       | San Francisco, | Dec. 1998      | 384 kbps         |
| Vid             | CA             |                | (two-way)        |
| eotron/Wavepath |                |                |                  |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+
| Metro.Net       | Northern       | N/A            | Up to 10 Mbps    |
|                 | California     |                | downstream,      |
|                 |                |                | telephone or     |
|                 |                |                | ISDN return path |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+
| SkyLynx         | Tampa, FL      | 4th Q 1998     | Up to 30 Mbps    |
| Communications, |                |                | downstream, up   |
| Inc.            | Fresno, CA     | N/A            | to 11 Mbps       |
|                 |                |                | upsteam          |
|                 |                |                |                  |
|                 |                |                | Same             |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+
| UltimateCom,    | Atlanta, GA    | Mar. 1998      | N/A , telephone  |
| LLC             |                |                | return path      |
|                 | Denver, CO     | N/A            |                  |
|                 |                |                | 3 Mbps (two-way) |
+-----------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+

**TABLE 2: UPPERBAND FIXED WIRELESS OPERATORS**

+------------+---------+------------+-----------+---------------------+
| *          | **Spe   | **Rollout  | **Subs    | **Services**        |
| *Company** | ctrum** | Areas**    | cribers** |                     |
+------------+---------+------------+-----------+---------------------+
| WinStar    | 28 and  | Top 30     | 380,000   | Voice, high speed   |
|            | 38 GHz  | markets in | lines in  | data, Internet      |
|            |         | the U.S.   | service   | access, and         |
|            |         |            |           | information         |
|            |         |            |           | services            |
+------------+---------+------------+-----------+---------------------+
| Teligent   | 24 GHz  | 28 markets | Access    | Voice, high speed   |
|            |         | nationwide | rights to | data, Internet      |
|            |         |            | 2,400     | access, and         |
|            |         |            | buildings | information         |
|            |         |            |           | services            |
+------------+---------+------------+-----------+---------------------+
| ART        | 38 GHz  | Seattle,   | Access    | High-speed Internet |
|            |         | WA         | rights to | access and Internet |
|            |         |            | 155       | services            |
|            |         | Portland,  | buildings |                     |
|            |         | OR         |           |                     |
|            |         |            |           |                     |
|            |         | Phoenix,   |           |                     |
|            |         | AZ         |           |                     |
+------------+---------+------------+-----------+---------------------+
| AT&T       | 38 GHz  |            |           | TCG used as back-up |
| (B         |         |            |           | and extension of    |
| iztel/TCG) |         |            |           | fiber network; AT&T |
|            |         |            |           | use unclear.        |
+------------+---------+------------+-----------+---------------------+
| S          | 28 GHz  | New York   | 2,000     | Internet access (up |
| peedUs.com | (LMDS)  | City Metro |           | to 48 Mbps          |
| (formerly  |         | Area       |           | downstream,         |
| Cellu      |         |            |           | telephone return    |
| larvision) |         |            |           | path)               |
+------------+---------+------------+-----------+---------------------+

**TABLE 3: RECENT LMDS AUCTION WINNERS**

+------------+------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| *          | **POPs**   | **Major      | **Announced Plans**        |
| *Company** |            | License      |                            |
|            |            | Areas**      |                            |
+------------+------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| Nextlink   | 50.8       | most major   | Acquired licenses of WNP   |
| Commu      | million    | U.S. cities  | and Nextband; plans to     |
| nications, | (A)        |              | offer LMDS commercially as |
| Inc.       |            |              | a complement to its CLEC   |
|            | 35.8       |              | fiber networks by end of   |
|            | million    |              | 1999                       |
|            | (B)        |              |                            |
+------------+------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| WinStar    | 14.7       | San          | Use of LMDS in conjunction |
|            | million    | Francisco,   | with its 38 GHz spectrum   |
|            | (A) 2.3    | New Orleans, | to extend its reach to     |
|            | million    | Salt Lake    | other cities               |
|            | (B)        | City,        |                            |
|            |            | Norfolk,     |                            |
|            |            | Orlando,     |                            |
|            |            | other parts  |                            |
|            |            | of           |                            |
|            |            | California   |                            |
+------------+------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| Touch      | 2.1        | parts of     | Begin LMDS buildout in     |
| America,   | million    | Montana,     | Helena and Billings, MT;   |
| Inc.       | (A) 2.1    | Wyoming,     | use spectrum to link 30    |
|            | million    | Utah,        | cities to its 10,000 mile  |
|            | (B)        | Colorado,    | fiber network; and         |
|            |            | Idaho, North | equipment contract with    |
|            |            | Dakota,      | Nortel                     |
|            |            | Washington,  |                            |
|            |            | Minnesota    |                            |
+------------+------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| BTA        | 3.0        | Colorado     | Begin offering LMDS        |
| Associates | million    |              | services by the end of     |
|            | (A)        |              | 1999                       |
|            | 675,000    |              |                            |
|            | (B)        |              |                            |
+------------+------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| Liberty    | 1.0        | throughout   | Begin offering LMDS        |
| Cellular,  | million    | Kansas       | service by late 1999;      |
| Inc.       | (A)        |              | equipment contract with    |
|            |            |              | Nortel                     |
|            | 1.0        |              |                            |
|            | million    |              |                            |
|            | (B)        |              |                            |
+------------+------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| US Unwired | 1.8        | Louisiana,   | Use of LMDS licenses to    |
|            | million    | eastern      | expand and complement its  |
|            | (A)        | Texas        | existing CLEC network and  |
|            |            |              | services                   |
|            | 325,000    |              |                            |
|            | (B)        |              |                            |
+------------+------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| Virginia   | 1.5        | Southwest    | Began LMDS deployment in   |
| Tech       | million    | Virginia     | Blacksburg, VA in May      |
| F          | (A)        |              | 1999; equipment donated by |
| oundation, |            |              | Wavtrace.                  |
| Inc.       |            |              |                            |
+------------+------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| Home       | 624,000    | Charleston,  | Begin deploying network in |
| Telephone  | (A)        | SC           | mid-1999; equipment        |
| Company,   |            |              | contract with Newbridge    |
| Inc.       |            |              | Networks                   |
+------------+------------+--------------+----------------------------+
| Tri-Corner | 163,000    | Durango, CO, | Begin offering LMDS        |
| Telecommun |            | Farmington,  | services by the end of     |
| i-cations, | (A and B)  | NM           | 1999                       |
| Inc.       |            |              |                            |
+------------+------------+--------------+----------------------------+

\(A\) indicates BTA A Block which consists of 1,150 MHz

\(B\) indicates BTA B Block which consists of 150 MHz

[^1]: ^?^ \"Licensees of cellular systems may use alternative cellular
    technologies and/or provide fixed services on a co-primary basis
    with their mobile offerings, including personal communications
    services . . . on the spectrum within their assigned channel
    block.\" 47 CFR § 22.902(d).

[^2]: ^?^ The terminology of fixed wireless technology is still being
    developed, and operators and equipment manufacturers often use
    generic terms in a proprietary way. AT&T, for example, refers to its
    fixed wireless technology as \"Fixed Wireless Service.\" Nortel
    refers to its technology as \"Fixed Wireless Access.\"

[^3]: ^?^ [WirelessNow]{.smallcaps}, Sep. 16, 1998, citing Global
    Wireless Local Loop Markets: 1998, [The Strategis Group]{.smallcaps}
    (1998).

[^4]: ^?^ *Bringing Local Loop to Puerto Rico*, [Wireless Business &
    Technology]{.smallcaps}, Jan. 1998, at 27.

[^5]: ^?^ Centennial Cellular Corp., Form S-4, Mar. 3, 1999, at 6. These
    numbers include Centennial\'s product aimed at business customers,
    known as \"BusinessPhone.\" *See* Centennial de Puerto Rico,
    *Centennial\'s Wireless System: Benefits & Advantages of
    Centennial\'s Wireless Products & Services* (visited Feb. 27, 1999)
    \<http://www.centennialpr.net/wireless.htm\>.

[^6]: ^?^ In addition to an AC power adapter, the phone comes with a
    12‑volt DC power pack that can be used during power outages or, for
    example, when the customer wants to take the phone outside.
    Centennial de Puerto Rico, *Centennial Scores a First with CDMA
    Fixed Wireless Phones* (visited Feb. 26, 1999)
    \<http://www.qualcomm.com/cdma/bulletin/centennial.html\>

[^7]: ^?^ *Un Telefone Que Se Activa Con Solo Enchufarlo*, Promotional
    Flyer, Centennial de Puerto Rico, Mar. 3, 1999. Additional minutes
    cost extra. There is also a plan costing \$39.95 per month, which
    includes 500 off-peak minutes and 90 peak minutes. *Id.*

[^8]: ^?^ *Un Telefone Que Se Activa Con Solo Enchufarlo*, Promotional
    Flyer, Centennial de Puerto Rico, Mar. 3, 1999.

[^9]: ^?^ *Id.* There is a \$69.95 activation charge if you lease the
    phone. The unit costs \$299. *Id.*

[^10]: ^?^ *Bringing Local Loop to Puerto Rico*, [Wireless Business &
    Technology]{.smallcaps}, Jan. 1998, at 27. Centennial does not
    charge for incoming calls because it is compensated by Puerto Rico
    Telephone Co., the local LEC, for connecting them.

[^11]: ^?^ According to the WWC, it was able to bring service to the
    region with approximately \$100,000 worth of infrastructure
    improvements. WWC claims it would have cost over \$1 million to
    provide wired service to the approximately 50 customers in the
    region. *Western Wireless Seeks Universal Service Fund Subsidies for
    Rural Operations*, [PCS Week]{.smallcaps}, Jul. 22, 1998.

[^12]: ^?^ *Western Wireless Seeks Universal Service Fund Subsidies for
    Rural Operations*, [PCS Week]{.smallcaps}, Jul. 22, 1998. Nevada
    Bell makes up the difference between the tariffed rate and WWC\'s
    cellular rates. Conversation with Christopher Johnson, Manager,
    Regulatory Affairs, Western Wireless Corp., Mar. 18, 1999.

[^13]: ^?^ The prototype unit, made by Telular Corp., costs
    approximately \$500, but is expected to be about half that price in
    mass production. Sound quality and data rates are those of WWC\'s
    AMPS-based cellular system in that area. Conversation with
    Christopher Johnson, Manager, Regulatory Affairs, Western Wireless
    Corp., Mar. 18, 1999.

[^14]: ^?^ Western Wireless spent \$350,000 building a cell site near
    town and leased 2,000 phone numbers from the local telephone company
    for \$320 per month. Bryan Gruley, *Battle Lines: As Phone Wars Move
    to Rural Towns, Tactics Are Growing Rougher; Fighting for Clients,
    Cash from Subsidies, Upstart Finds Its Main Cable Cut; \'Not the
    900‑Pound Gorilla,\'* [The Wall Street Journal]{.smallcaps}, Feb.
    10, 1999 (\"*Gruley*\").

[^15]: ^?^ North Dakota Governor Edward Shafer and Western Wireless CEO
    John Stanton placed the inaugural calls on Regent\'s new system to
    North Dakota Senator Byron Dorgan and Federal Communications
    Commission Chairman William Kennard. Regent, ND is the home town of
    Sen. Dorgan. [WirelessNow]{.smallcaps}, Jan. 8, 1999. WWC picked
    Regent because Sen. Dorgan, addressing an industry conference two
    years ago, challenged Mr. Stanton to demonstrate that he could
    provide competition in Regent and thereby show that wireless
    technology can provide competition anywhere. *Gruley*.

[^16]: ^?^ *Incumbent Shuts Down Competitive Wireless LEC: Service Is
    \'Unauthorized,\'* [Communications Daily]{.smallcaps}, Jan. 12,
    1999.

[^17]: ^?^ *Id.*

[^18]: ^?^ *ND LEC Cuts Western Wireless Service*,
    [WirelessNow]{.smallcaps}, Jan. 18, 1999
    \<http://www.commnow.com/\>. However, litigation in this case
    continues. *See, e.g.,* Expedited Motion for Preliminary Injunctive
    Relief of Western Wireless Corp., Western Wireless Corp. v.
    Consolidated Telephone Cooperative, Case No. PU-1564-99-17 (N.D.
    P.S.C. filed Jan. 15, 1999); Complaint of Western Wireless Corp.,
    Western Wireless Corp. v. Consolidated Telephone Cooperative (FCC
    filed Jan. 29, 1999).

[^19]: ^?^ CTIA Notebook[, Communications Daily]{.smallcaps}, Feb. 9,
    1999.

[^20]: ^?^ *Gruley*.

[^21]: ^?^ CTIA Notebook[, Communications Daily]{.smallcaps}, Feb. 9,
    1999. WWC CEO John Stanton claims that WWC provides service at a
    fraction of the \$200 monthly per subscriber subsidy covered by the
    Universal Service Fund. *Id.*

[^22]: ^?^ *AT&T\'s Breakthrough Wireless Technology New Alternative for
    Local Service*, News Release, AT&T Corp., Feb. 25, 1997.

[^23]: ^?^ The new system was designed to connect a consumer\'s home to
    an AT&T digital switching center via a neighborhood antenna mounted
    on a utility pole or other structure. A single antenna could serve
    up to 2,000 homes. The only new equipment required on the
    customer\'s house is a transceiver about the size of a pizza box
    that can be mounted on the side or back of a house. *Id.*

[^24]: ^?^ *Fixed Wireless Service: Questions & Answers*, AT&T Corp.
    Promotional Brochure, May 1997.

[^25]: ^?^ Peter Elstrom, *AT&T\'s Wireless Path to Local Service:
    \"Project Angel\" Will Back Up Ma Bell\'s Cable Forays*, [Business
    Week]{.smallcaps}, Dec. 28, 1998.

[^26]: ^?^ *Cell Phones, PDAs Merge*, [PCS Week]{.smallcaps}, Feb. 15,
    1999.

[^27]: ^?^ *Dallas Tapped for Project Angel Fixed Wireless Trial*,
    [WirelessNow]{.smallcaps}, May 20, 1999.

[^28]: ^?^ *Cell Phones, PDAs Merge*, [PCS Week]{.smallcaps}, Feb. 15,
    1999. There are other trials as well. For example, in October 1998,
    Pioneer Holdings, LLC, owned by Long Line Limited, MCI, and
    Northwest Iowa Power Cooperative (NIPCO), joined two other companies
    in launching a fixed wireless access trial to 25 customers outside
    of Hayward, IA. Karissa Todd, *The Road to Local Competition,*
    [Wireless Review]{.smallcaps}, Nov. 30, 1998. *See also*, Pioneer
    Holdings, LLC, *Projects* (visited Feb 28, 1999)
    \<http://www.pioneerholdiings.com/site/new/projects.html\>.

[^29]: ^?^ Multichannel Video Programming Distributors (\"MVPD\") that
    use microwave frequencies in the multichannel multipoint
    distribution service (\"MMDS\"), multipoint distribution service
    (\"MDS\"), and instructional television fixed service (\"ITFS\") to
    transmit video programming to subscribers equipped with special
    rooftop antennas are typically referred to as MMDS or wireless cable
    systems. *See* Annual Assessment of the Status of Competition in the
    Market for the Delivery of Video Programming, *Third Annual Report*,
    12 FCC Rcd 4358, 4386 n. 152 (1997).

[^30]: ^?^ *Heartland Wireless and Wireless One Dropping Video Focus*,
    [Communications Daily]{.smallcaps}, Mar. 22, 1999 (\"*[Comm.
    Daily]{.smallcaps} 3/22/99*\").

[^31]: ^?^ *See* Annual Assessment of the Status of Competition in
    Markets for the Delivery of Video Programming, *Fifth Annual
    Report*, FCC 98-335 (rel. Dec. 23, 1998), at ¶ 82. The maximum
    capacity of analog MMDS is 33 channels, while 62 percent of all
    cable television subscribers received at least 54 channels in
    October 1998. *See* *Id.*, at ¶¶ 19-21, 82.

[^32]: ^?^ In April 1998, Standard & Poor\'s lowered its debt rating on
    all wireless cable companies to CCC+ or lower, stating that analog
    wireless was not a viable competitor to cable. *S&P Says Analog
    Wireless Cable Isn\'t Viable, Downgrades Industry*, [Communications
    Daily]{.smallcaps}, Apr. 17, 1998. On July 30, 1998, CAI Wireless
    Systems, Inc. declared bankruptcy. CAI Wireless Systems, Inc., Form
    8-K, Aug. 4, 1998. On October 7, 1998, Heartland Wireless Systems,
    Inc. declared bankruptcy. *S&P Says Analog Wireless Cable Isn\'t
    Viable, Downgrades Industry*, [Communications Daily]{.smallcaps},
    Apr. 17, 1998.

[^33]: ^?^ *See* Table 1 at F-16 for a summary of Internet access
    offerings by wireless cable operators. *Heartland\'s Bankruptcy May
    Set Back 2-Way Wireless Internet*, [Communications
    Daily]{.smallcaps}, Oct. 9, 1998; *Wireless Cable Told to Focus on
    Wholesaling, Internet*, [Communications Daily]{.smallcaps}, Oct. 27,
    1998; *MMDS Companies Realign Their Interests; Announce Cooperation
    on Flexible 2-Way Use of Their Spectrum*, News Release, Heartland
    Wireless Communications, Inc., Dec. 3, 1998.

[^34]: ^?^ *See* Wireless Communications Association International
    Comments, at 21, Annual Assessment of the Status of Competition in
    Markets for the Delivery of Video Programming, CS Docket No. 98-102
    (Jul. 31, 1998).

[^35]: ^?^ *See* Amendment of Parts 1, 21, and 74 to Enable Multipoint
    Distribution Service and Instructional Television Fixed Service
    Licensees to Engage in Fixed Two-Way Transmission, *Report and
    Order*, FCC 98-231 (rel. Sep. 25, 1998).

[^36]: ^?^ *See* Mike Farrell, *Wireless Ops Hope Two-Way Ruling Helps*,
    [Multichannel News]{.smallcaps}, Sep. 28, 1998, at 3, 32
    (\"*Farrell*\"); Annual Assessment of the Status of Competition in
    Markets for the Delivery of Video Programming, *Fifth Annual
    Report*, FCC 98-335 (rel. Dec. 23, 1998).

[^37]: ^?^ *[Comm. Daily]{.smallcaps} 3/22/99*.

[^38]: ^?^ *[Comm. Daily]{.smallcaps} 3/22/99*.

[^39]: ^?^ Rebecca Blumenstein and Nicole Harris, *MCI WorldCom
    Purchases the Debt of Group of Wireless-Cable Concerns*, [The Wall
    Street Journal]{.smallcaps}, Mar. 30, 1999; MCI WorldCom\'s Wireless
    Cable Plans Seen Widening Broadband Options, [Communications
    Dialy]{.smallcaps}, Mar. 31, 1999.

[^40]: ^?^ *Id.*

[^41]: ^?^ Nicole Harris, *Sprint to Purchase Wireless-Cable Firm
    American Telecasting for \$167.8 Million*, [The Wall Street
    Journal]{.smallcaps}, Apr. 28, 1999.

[^42]: ^?^ *MMDS Industry Facts*, [Private Cable & Wireless
    Cable]{.smallcaps}, Dec. 1998, at 13.

[^43]: ^?^ IJNT International/UrJet InterNet, *UrJet Internet* (visited
    Jun. 14, 1999) \<http://www.urjet.net/urjet.taf\>.

[^44]: ^?^ *SkyLynx Communications, Inc. Announces Commencement of
    Trading,* News Release, SkyLynx Communications, Inc., Jul. 30, 1998;
    SkyLynx Communications, Inc., *Wireless Markets* (visited Jun. 14,
    1999) \<http://www.skylynx.com\>.

[^45]: ^?^ *SkyLynx Communications Enters Sarasota Wireless Market*,
    News Release, SkyLynx Communications, Inc., Dec. 16, 1998; SkyLynx
    Communications, Inc., *Welcome to SkyLynx* (visited Feb. 23, 1999)
    \<http://www.skylynx.com/home.html\>.

[^46]: ^?^ Marcia Martinek, *Rural Regional & Remunerative*, [Wireless
    Review]{.smallcaps}, Feb. 1, 1999.

[^47]: ^?^ Carol Sowers, *High‑Tech Phones for Tribe Salt River
    Reservation 1st to Use Small Dish*, [The Arizona
    Republic]{.smallcaps}, Dec. 12, 1998 (\"*Sowers*\").

[^48]: ^?^ David Trinkwon, Director - Market development, Fixed Wireless
    Access, Nortel Networks, *New Fixed Wireless Access Solutions . . .
    Now \"Alive\" in the USA*, Presentation to NARUC, Orlando, Florida,
    Nov. 6, 1998.

[^49]: ^?^ *Sowers*.

[^50]: ^?^ *Id.* The service is operated by a tribal telecommunications
    division, Saddleback Communications, and its subcontractor, Mountain
    Telecommunications, Inc. David Trinkwon, Director - Market
    Development, Fixed Wireless Access, Nortel Networks, *New Fixed
    Wireless Access Solutions . . . Now \"Alive\" in the USA*,
    Presentation to NARUC, Orlando, Florida, Nov. 6, 1998.

[^51]: ^?^ *Sowers*.

[^52]: ^?^ *Id.*

[^53]: ^?^ *Id.*

[^54]: ^?^ DEMS spans 24.25 - 25.25 GHz; LMDS spans 27.5 - 31.3 GHz; 39
    GHz spans 38.6 ‑ 40.0 GHz. 39 GHz is often referred to as 38 GHz.
    *See* Table 2 at F-18 for a summary of current service offerings by
    upperband operators.

[^55]: ^?^ Jeff Bounds, *Uncertain Future: Will the Market Accept LMDS?
    Bosch, Others Gamble on New Technology,* [Dallas Business
    Journal]{.smallcaps}, Jul. 3, 1998.

[^56]: ^?^ Teligent, Inc., *New! Local Private Line Keeps Your Business
    Connected* (visited Feb. 27, 1999) \<http://www.teligent.com\>.

[^57]: ^?^ *Teligent* *Brings More Bandwidth at Lower Cost to Seattle
    Small and Mid-Sized Businesses*, News Release, Teligent, Inc., Jun.
    8, 1999. *See* Appendix H, Map 13 at H-13.

[^58]: ^?^ *Teligent Reports Third Quarter Financial Results, Completes
    Launch of First 15 Markets*, News Release, Teligent, Inc., Nov. 11,
    1998.

[^59]: ^?^ *Teligent Reports 1998 Financial Results, Sets Operating
    Benchmarks for 1999,* News Release, Teligent, Inc., Mar. 1, 1999;
    *Teligent Reports Third Quarter Financial Results, Completes Launch
    of First 15 Markets*, News Release, Teligent, Inc., Nov. 11, 1998.

[^60]: ^?^ *See, e.g.,* Ken Freed, *NextLink Slowly Positions for Big
    Wireless Play*, [Interactive Week]{.smallcaps}, Feb. 15, 1999.

[^61]: ^?^ *See* Appendix A, Tables 1 and 2 for summaries of the
    auction\'s design and outcome and *Third Report* *Appendixes*, at
    A-6 for a list of high bidders.

[^62]: ^?^ *See WinStar Wins 15 LMDS Licenses in FCC Auction*, News
    Release, WinStar Communications, Inc., Mar. 26, 1998; Jeannine
    Aversa, *Licenses for Wireless Service Auctioned*, [The Washington
    Post]{.smallcaps}, Mar. 26, 1998, at C3.

[^63]: ^?^ Cathy Stephens, *Jumpstarting LMDS*, [Private Cable &
    Wireless Cable]{.smallcaps}, Oct. 1998, at 18.

[^64]: ^?^ *See* Table 3 at F-19 for a summary of current activity by
    recent LMDS auction winners.

[^65]: ^?^ Cathy Stephens, *Jumpstarting LMDS*, [Private Cable &
    Wireless Cable]{.smallcaps}, Oct. 1998, at 18.

[^66]: ^?^ Cathy Stephens, *Weighing the LMDS Architecture Options*,
    Private Cable & Wireless Cable, Jan. 1999, at 32 (quoting Phil
    Goetz, the chief architect for Lucent\'s broadband fixed wireless
    products); *Q&A with Thomas H. Jones of WNP Communications*,
    [Private Cable & Wireless Cable]{.smallcaps}, Nov. 1998, at 50.

[^67]: ^?^ *Internet Industry Facts*, [Private Cable & Wireless
    Cable]{.smallcaps}, Dec. 1998, at 16.

[^68]: ^?^ *LMDS Industry Facts*, [Private Cable & Wireless
    Cable]{.smallcaps}, Dec. 1998, at 11.

[^69]: ^?^ \"Auction of Local Multipoint Distribution Service Spectrum,
    Auction Notice and Filing Requirements for 168 Local Multipoint
    Distribution Service Licenses Scheduled for April 27, 1999, Minimum
    Opening Bids and Other Procedural Issues,\" *Public Notice*, DA
    99‑266 (rel. Jan. 29, 1999).

[^70]: ^?^ Nextlink Communications, Inc.*, Cities We Serve* (visited
    Jun. 14, 1999) \<http://www.nextlink.com/usmap.html\>.

[^71]: ^?^ *NEXTLINK Communications To Acquire WNP Communications for
    \$695 Million*, News Release, Nextlink Communications, Inc., Jan.
    14, 1999. On March 30, 1999, the FCC approved the assignment of
    WNP\'s licenses to Nextlink. \"Wireless Telecommunications Bureau
    Public Safety and Private Wireless Division Grants Consent to Assign
    Authorizations of WNP Cmmunications, Inc. and PCO Aquisition
    Corp.,\" *Public Notice*, DA 99‑610 (rel. Mar. 30, 1999); *Nextlink
    Closes WNP Acquisition; Becomes Largest Holder of Fixed Wireless
    Spectrum in North America,* News Release, Nextlink Communications,
    Inc., Apr. 27, 1999.

[^72]: ^?^ *See* Appendix H, Map 14 at H-14.

[^73]: ^?^ *McCaw\'s Big-Picture Strategy Comes into Clearer Focus as
    Nextel Chief Consolidates Domestic LMDS Holdings*, [PCS
    Week]{.smallcaps}, Jan. 27, 1999; *McCaw Aims to Consolidate
    Domestic LMDS Spectrum Holdings*, [Communications
    Today]{.smallcaps}, Jan. 15, 1999.

[^74]: ^?^ SPEEDUS.COM, Inc., *SPEEDUS.COM, Inc. and Nextlink Sign \$40
    Million Pact, Nextlink Agrees to Purchase Two Million Shares at \$10
    Per Share*, News Release, SPEEDUS.COM, Inc., June 14, 1999.

[^75]: ^?^ These other carriers include CLECs, Competitive Access
    Providers (\"CAPs\"), inter-exchange carriers (\"IXCs\"), LECs, and
    Internet Service Providers (\"ISPs\").

[^76]: ^?^ Winstar Communications, Inc., *Business Services* (visited
    Feb. 27, 1999) \<http://www.winstar.com/indexBuisServ.htm\>. *See*
    Appendix H, Map 15 at H-15.

[^77]: ^?^ *WinStar Reports On-Net Building Penetration Jumps to 14
    Percent*, News Release, WinStar Communications, Inc., May 12, 1999.

[^78]: ^?^ *\$2 Billion Winstar / Lucent Strategic Agreement to Expand
    Winstar's Broadband Network*, News Release, WinStar Communications,
    Inc., Oct. 22, 1998. In April 1998, WinStar purchased a 15 percent
    stake in Advanced Radio Telecom. *WinStar to Purchase 14.9% of
    Advanced Radio Telecom Corp.*, [Business Wire]{.smallcaps}, Apr. 27,
    1998.

[^79]: ^?^ *Winstar Reports First Quarter Results*, News Release,
    WinStar Communications, Inc., May 12, 1999.

[^80]: ^?^ *Winstar Achieves Access Rights to More Than 4,200 Commercial
    Buildings Nationwide*, News Release, WinStar Communications, Inc.,
    Dec. 17, 1998.

[^81]: ^?^ Advanced Radio Telecom, Inc., *Technical Information*
    (visited Mar. 1, 1999)
    \<http://www.art‑net.net/technical/tech.htm\>. Internet services
    include web hosting and e-commerce.

[^82]: ^?^ *See* Appendix I, Map 16 at I-16.

[^83]: ^?^ *Advanced Radio Telecom Corp. Announces Operating Results for
    Fourth Quarter 1998*, News Release, Advanced Radio Telecom, Inc.,
    Jan. 12, 1999; *Advanced Radio Telecom Launches Internet Services in
    Portland*, News Release, Advanced Radio Telecom, Inc., Dec. 21,
    1998; *Advanced Radio Telecom Corp. Announces Operating Results for
    Fourth Quarter 1998*, News Release, Advanced Radio Telecom, Inc.,
    Jan. 12, 1999; Advanced Radio Telecom, Inc., *Who We Are* (visited
    Mar. 1, 1999) \<http://www.art-net.net/about/who.htm\>.

[^84]: ^?^ *Qwest Communications and Investor Group Commit \$251 Million
    to Advanced Radio Telecom To Expand Its High-Speed Local Wireless
    Network*, News Release, Advanced Radio Telecom Corp, June 1, 1999.

[^85]: ^?^ *Advanced Radio Telecom Corp. Announces Operating Results for
    Fourth Quarter 1998*, News Release, Advanced Radio Telecom, Inc.,
    Jan. 12, 1999.

[^86]: ^?^ Telephony[, Communications Daily]{.smallcaps}, Jun. 4, 1998.

[^87]: ^?^ *See* Appendix I, Map 17 at I-17.

[^88]: ^?^ *AT&T Completes TCG Merger; TCG Now Core of AT&T Local
    Services Network Unit*, News Release, AT&T Corp., Jul. 23, 1998.

[^89]: ^?^ Teleport Communications Group, Inc., *TCG Home Page* (visited
    Mar. 1, 1999) \<http://www.tcg.com\>.

[^90]: ^?^ Teleport Communications Group, Inc., Form 10-K405, Dec. 31,
    1996, at 10.

[^91]: ^?^ Bill Menezes, *MCI WorldCom Discovers Fixed Wireless*,
    [Wireless Week]{.smallcaps}, Feb. 8, 1999, at 25.

[^92]: ^?^ According to a WinStar, it can cost up to 85 percent less to
    provide phone service through the air than through a fiber network.
    Suzanne King, *Gaining a Foothold*, [Kansas City Business
    Journal]{.smallcaps}, Nov. 13, 1998.

[^93]: ^?^ To qualify for the maximum discount, customers switch their
    existing service ‑‑ local, long distance or Internet ‑‑ and sign up
    with Teligent for a minimum of one year. Teligent averages several
    representative bills from the customer\'s current carriers and
    deducts up to 30 percent. That figure becomes the customer\'s new
    flat monthly rate. Local and Internet service are unlimited. If
    customers wish to increase their long distance usage over current
    levels, they can purchase more service at what the company believes
    are attractive prices. *Teligent Introduces Revolutionary,
    Lower‑Cost Communications Services In New Orleans*, News Release,
    Teligent, Inc., Feb. 25, 1999.

[^94]: ^?^ *See* *Ex Parte* presentation materials of Winstar
    Communications, Inc., CC Docket No. 96-98; CS Docket 95-184; CCBPol
    97-9; CC Docket 98-146; IB Docket No: 97-95 (FCC filed Nov. 20,
    1998).

[^95]: ^?^ Estimates of this large market vary. Teligent estimates that
    fiber networks today reach only 3 percent of the 750,000 office
    buildings in the U.S. (although the company conditions that that 3
    percent actually reaches 35 percent of \"fiber‑addressable
    businesses\"). Nancy Gohring, *Wireless Networks: Broadband Wireless
    Operators Build Their Case*, [Telephony]{.smallcaps}, Jul. 6, 1998.
    Roberta Woods, director of Wireless Market Research at Pioneer
    Consulting, claims that 99 percent of the estimated 4.6 million
    commercial buildings in the United States are not served by fiber.
    Charles Mason, *LMDS: Huge Niche Technology*, [America\'s
    Network]{.smallcaps}, Sep. 1, 1998.

[^96]: ^?^ WinStar believes small and medium sized businesses constitute
    60 percent of all businesses in the United States and represent a
    market opportunity in excess of \$30 billion per year. Winstar
    Communications, Inc., Form 10-K, Dec. 31, 1997, at 6.

[^97]: ^?^ Inquiry Concerning the Deployment of Advanced
    Telecommunications Capability to All Americans in a Reasonable and
    Timely Fashion, and Possible Steps to Accelerate Such Deployment
    Pursuant to Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996,
    *Report*, CC Docket No. 98-146 (rel. Feb. 2, 1999), at ¶¶ 45-46.

[^98]: ^?^ As for all CLECs, the successful negotiation of these
    agreements on favorable terms is essential to the success of WLL. In
    addition, in the near term, providers of WLL will still need to rely
    on LECs for many of the unbundled network elements required to
    provide telephone service (*e.g.,* switching and operator services).
    As fixed wireless access providers expand their operations and begin
    to take customers from incumbent LECs, disputes such as the one
    between Western Wireless and Consolidated Telephone (see above) may
    become more common.

[^99]: ^?^ *See* WinStar Communications, Inc.\'s Comments at 5;
    Teligent, Inc.\'s Comments at 6-8, filed in response to \"Common
    Carrier Bureau Seeks Recommendations on Commission Actions Critical
    to the Promotion of Efficient Local Exchange Competition,\" *Public
    Notice*, 12 FCC Rcd 10,343 (1997).

[^100]: ^?^ WinStar argues it should not have to pay rights of way fees
    because its network is deployed on rooftops, which are private
    property, rather than the public rights-of way. *See id.*

[^101]: ^?^ In July 1998, a federal district court ordered the city of
    Dallas to halt imposition of franchise fees or linking payment of
    right‑of‑way charges with certifying new wireless carriers, saying
    such actions exceed regulatory limits under state and federal law.
    *U.S. Judge Rejects Dallas Bid to Impose Fees on Wireless Carriers*,
    [Communications Daily]{.smallcaps}, Jul. 8, 1998.

[^102]: ^?^ 47 U.S.C. 214(e)(2).

[^103]: ^?^ Western Wireless Corp., Petition for Preemption, Pursuant to
    Section 253 of the Communications Act, of Kansas Statutes and Rules
    that Discriminate Against New Entrants, Jul. 20, 1998, at n. 18.