**FCC 06-77**

**Released: June 8, 2006**

**FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION SEEKS PUBLIC COMMENT ON CREATION OF
A SPECTRUM SHARING INNOVATION TEST-BED**

**ET Docket No. 06-89**

**Comment Date: July 10, 2006**

**Reply Comment Date: July 24, 2006**

Demand for spectrum by federal and non-federal users has been increasing
and this trend is expected to continue as new and enhanced services and
applications and new requirements are identified and developed.
Recognizing this trend, the Commission and the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration ("NTIA")[^1] seek to
evaluate innovative methods for spectrum sharing among disparate users
to enable more intensive use of the finite radio spectrum. One way of
accomplishing this task is to set up a test-bed where both federal and
non-federal users could undertake one or more studies and experiments to
test these ideas. This Public Notice seeks comment on a wide range of
issues that are integral to the creation of such a test-bed, which will
be called the Spectrum Sharing Innovation Test-Bed ("Test Bed"). NTIA is
also soliciting comment on many of these same issues through a Notice of
Inquiry.[^2]

By way of background, on May 29, 2003, the President established the
"Spectrum Policy Initiative" by issuing an Executive Memorandum to
initiate an examination of the existing legal and policy framework for
spectrum management in order to better optimize the use of U.S. spectrum
assets for federal and non-federal users.[^3] The Commission was
encouraged to participate in this review and to provide input to the
NTIA on these issues.

In June 2004, the U.S. Department of Commerce issued two reports with
policy recommendations for improving spectrum management. One report
addressed federal spectrum use and the other addressed commercial and
state and local public safety spectrum use.[^4] Both reports included a
recommendation that the Commission and the NTIA develop a Spectrum
Sharing Innovation Test-Bed for use in planning how spectrum can best be
shared between federal and non-federal users. Specifically, the test-bed
recommendation states:

> *Within two years of this report's publication, NTIA and the FCC
> should establish a pilot program to allow for increased sharing
> between federal and non-federal users. NTIA and the FCC should each
> identify a segment of spectrum of equal bandwidth within their
> respective jurisdiction for this program. Each segment should be
> approximately 10 MHz for assignment on a shared basis for federal and
> non-federal use. The spectrum to be identified for this pilot program
> could come from bands currently allocated on either an exclusive or
> shared basis. Two years after the inception of the pilot program, NTIA
> and the FCC should provide reports outlining the results and
> suggesting appropriate procedures for expanding the program as
> appropriate.*

To assist the Commission in developing its recommendations on this
issue, we are requesting that interested parties submit comments and
information on a Test-Bed program to study the feasibility of increasing
the efficient use of spectrum that is shared between federal and
non-federal users. To provide guidance to the public, we are including,
as part of this public notice, specific questions/issues relating to the
Test-Bed pilot program. These questions/issues are intended to promote
discussion and comment across a range of issues and are not intended, in
any way, to limit the scope of the comments filed in response to this
Public Notice. In this regard, parties are encouraged to file comments
on related issues even if they do not respond directly to any particular
question posed.

To ensure that the results of experiments using the Test-Bed are
informative for evaluating possible federal and non-federal sharing
opportunities, we believe that the goal(s) of the Test-Bed must first be
defined (*i.e*., description of the issues to be studied) and then
appropriate spectrum can be identified. For convenience, we have divided
the questions/issues into three categories: A) Goal and Scope of the
Test-Bed program; B) Logistics to create and implement the Test-Bed
program; and C) Conclusion and evaluation of the Test-Bed program. In
providing answers to the questions below, we ask that commenters provide
details regarding specific experiments for the Test-Bed.

[A: Goal and Scope of the Test-Bed Program]{.underline}

To define the Test-Bed program more precisely so that it can provide the
greatest benefit for all spectrum users (federal and non-federal), we
seek comment on the following questions:

1.  The Test-Bed could be used to effectuate many goals, including
    testing dynamic spectrum access techniques, developing new
    technologies for public safety, and streamlining spectrum
    coordination processes between federal and non-federal users. We
    seek comment on these goals, as well as other goals that commenters
    believe will satisfy the purpose of the spectrum sharing innovation
    Test-Bed.

    a.  In satisfying the identified goals, are there particular
        technologies or areas of interest about which the Test-Bed
        should focus (*e.g.*, cognitive radios, smart antennas,
        determining different ways to measure spectrum efficiency,
        determining ways of increasing spectrum efficiency, determining
        how technology could be used more efficiently)?

    b.  What challenges are spectrum users facing that the Test-Bed can
        be used to resolve? What type of information should we expect
        the Test-Bed to produce? What type of issues should we expect
        the Test-Bed to resolve?

2.  Should the Test-Bed encompass a single experiment or should multiple
    experiments be undertaken at any given time? If the latter, should
    there be different requirements (whether technical or legal) applied
    to the various experiments? If so, what should the requirements be
    and what are the justifications for the differing requirements?

[B: Logistics to Create and Implement the Test-Bed Program]{.underline}

3.  What criteria should be used in identifying candidate frequency
    band(s) for the Test-Bed program? What relationship should the
    frequency bands have to the goal(s) identified for the Test-Bed?

4.  As stated in the recommendation, a minimum of 20 MHz (10 MHz
    identified by NTIA and 10 MHz identified by the Commission) is
    suggested for the Test-Bed program. How much spectrum should the
    Commission consider identifying for the Test-Bed program?

    a.  What particular portion(s) of spectrum should be identified for
        this purpose? Commenters should explain how the identified
        spectrum will facilitate satisfying the identified goals.

    b.  Based on the goal(s) identified and/or the specific experiments
        proposed, commenters should specify whether the Test-Bed
        requires contiguous or non-contiguous spectrum. For experiments
        requiring non-contiguous spectrum, commenters should specify the
        required spectrum block size and frequency separation needed
        (*i.e.,* tradeoffs between frequency-division multiplexing
        needs v. time-division multiplexing needs).

    c.  Should the Commission focus on identifying non-federal exclusive
        or federal/non-federal shared spectrum?

    d.  How should the particular spectrum bands identified for Test-Bed
        use be determined? Should the bands be selected by the
        Commission or are there marketplace mechanisms that can be used?

5.  One of the tools the Commission has at its disposal is the
    experimental licensing program which allows licensees to use
    spectrum on a non-interference basis to experiment with new
    technologies and innovations. Under the experimental licensing
    program, users may identify any spectrum of interest for
    experimentation and are generally authorized for up to two years
    with the possibility of renewal. Should users be authorized for use
    of the Test-Bed through use of the experimental licensing program?
    Alternatively, the Commission could conduct a rulemaking proceeding
    to specifically authorize various uses and frequency bands. We
    request that commenters provide details regarding which method is
    most advantageous for meeting the goal(s) of the program. In
    providing information regarding this question, commenters should
    keep in mind the following:

    a.  Experimental licensing rules and procedures are already
        contained in Part 5 of the Commission's rules. Thus, these
        procedures could be used without further action by the
        Commission.

    b.  Experimental licensing is flexible (*i.e.*, under experimental
        licenses, licensees have no rights to use the spectrum
        exclusively, may not cause harmful interference to any user and
        are not protected from harmful interference caused by other
        spectrum users).

    c.  A rulemaking proceeding may need to specifically identify
        potential modifications to the table of spectrum allocations,
        usage restrictions, and licensee rights for both the Test-Bed
        user and any incumbent licensees. Commenters who advocate such
        an approach should provide details regarding spectrum bands,
        proposed usage, how users should be authorized for use of the
        Test-Bed (*e.g.*, obtain a license through one of the
        Commission's licensing systems), and user status (*i.e.,*
        primary, secondary, non-interference basis) and the relationship
        of the Test-Bed user to incumbents.

6.  Options exist for implementation of the Test-Bed with respect to a
    specific geographic area. Commenters should provide details
    regarding the necessity for experimentation to occur over large or
    small areas. Similarly, commenters should provide details regarding
    whether experiments can be limited to rural areas or areas where
    there are relatively few incumbent users. One advantage to such an
    approach is that the risk of causing harmful interference to an
    incumbent user is reduced. We seek comment on whether such a
    restriction should exist and on other methods of ensuring that
    incumbent users are protected from interference.

7.  What information should be provided to the Commission prior to
    initiating use of the Test-Bed? For example, should the Commission
    require submission of pre-experiment assumptions, analysis (modeling
    and simulation), and pre-experiment predictions?

8.  If there are competing proposals for use of the Test-Bed, what
    criteria should be used to select candidates? Should multiple
    candidates be selected? If so, what procedures are needed for these
    candidates to coordinate with each other?

9.  Are special procedures necessary for non-federal users of the
    Test-Bed to coordinate usage with federal users of the Test-Bed?

10. What other issues or factors should be considered with respect to
    creation of a Test-Bed?

11. Should Commission personnel (along with personnel whom NTIA may
    assign) be appointed as overseers to gauge the progress of the
    program? Is a more or less active role by the FCC desired?

12. What resources, if any, including equipment to be evaluated in the
    Test-Bed, funding, personnel, or facilities could parties provide
    for the Test-Bed program? Would use of private resources potentially
    create conflicts of interest among Test-Bed users?

13. To promote participation by interested parties, should the creation
    and use of any incentives be considered? What incentives, if any,
    could be considered and by whom should they be created and offered?

14. Should use of proprietary technologies or information be permitted
    in the Test-Bed? If so, how should release of data based on their
    use be handled?

[C: Conclusion and Evaluation of the Test-Bed Program]{.underline}

15. What metrics should be used in evaluating the
    results/accomplishments of the Test-Bed program?

16. If the program meets the performance metrics, should it be expanded
    to other frequency bands, and/or other locations? Why or why not?

17. What expectations should be placed on equipment and techniques
    developed during the experiment(s)? For example, should there be an
    expectation that a successful experiment would translate into
    permanent usage or at the minimum a rulemaking proceeding by the
    Commission to explore rule changes consistent with the experiment
    results?

18. At the conclusion of any experiment, should users be required to
    submit a report detailing the experiment -- goal, assumptions,
    methodology, and results?

*Comment Filing Procedures*. Interested parties may file comments no
later than

**July 10, 2006**. Reply comments are due not later than **July 24,
2006**. All filings should refer to **ET Docket No. 06-89**. Comments
may be filed using the Commission\'s Electronic Comment Filing System
(ECFS) or the Federal Government's eRulemaking Portal, or by filing
paper copies.

*Electronic Filers*. Comments may be filed electronically using the
Internet by accessing the ECFS: <http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/> or the
Federal eRulemaking Portal:
[http://www.regulations.gov](http://www.regulations.gov/). Filers should
follow the instructions provided on the website for submitting comments.
In completing the transmittal screen, filers should include their full
name, U.S. Postal Service mailing address, and the applicable docket or
rulemaking number. Parties may also submit an electronic comment by
Internet e-mail. To get filing instructions, filers should send an
e-mail to <ecfs@fcc.gov>, and include the following words in the body of
the message, "get form." A sample form and directions will be sent in
response.

*Paper Filers*. Parties who choose to file by paper must file an
original and four copies of each filing. Filings can be sent by hand or
messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class
or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail (although we continue to
experience delays in receiving U.S. Postal Service mail). All filings
must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of the
Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.

-   The Commission's contractor will receive hand-delivered or
    messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary at
    236 Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110, Washington, DC 20002. The
    filing hours at this location are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand
    deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any
    envelopes must be disposed of before entering the building.

-   Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express
    Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton Drive,
    Capitol Heights, MD 20743.

-   U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail should
    be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW, Washington DC 20554.

*Availability of Documents*. Comments, reply comments, and *ex parte*
submissions will be available for public inspection during regular
business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Federal Communications
Commission, 445 12^th^ Street, S.W., CY-A257, Washington, D.C., 20554.
These documents will also be available via ECFS. Documents will be
available electronically in ASCII, Word 97, and/or Adobe Acrobat.

*Accessibility Information*. To request information in accessible
formats (computer diskettes, large print, audio recording, and Braille),
send an e-mail to <fcc504@fcc.gov> or call the FCC's Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432
(TTY). This document can also be downloaded in Word and Portable
Document Format (PDF) at: [http://www.fcc.gov](http://www.fcc.gov/).

*Additional Information*. For additional information on this proceeding,
contact Saurbh Chhabra, at (202) 418-2266,
[saurbh.chhabra@fcc.gov](../saurbh.chhabra@fcc.gov), or Ira Keltz, at
(202) 418-0616, <Ira.Keltz@fcc.gov>, Electromagnetic Compatibility
Division, Office of Engineering and Technology.

Action by the Commission on May 25, 2006:  By Commissioner Tate;
Chairman Martin; Commissioners Copps and Adelstein issuing separate
statements.

-FCC-

**STATEMENT OF**

**CHAIRMAN KEVIN J. MARTIN**

*Re: Federal Communications Commission Seeks Public Comment on Creation
of a Spectrum Sharing Innovation Test-Bed, ET Docket No. 06-89*

I am pleased that the Commission and the National Telecommunications and
Information Administration (NTIA) are examining ways to share spectrum
between federal and non-federal spectrum users.  The President's
Spectrum Policy Initiative produced many significant -- and promising --
policy recommendations, including the establishment of a spectrum test
bed. Finding ways to share federal and non-federal spectrum could
facilitate new and enhanced services for public safety, consumers, and
businesses.  I look forward to working with NTIA as we move forward on
this initiative.

**STATEMENT OF**

**COMMISSIONER MICHAEL J. COPPS**

 

 

*Re:     FCC Seeks Public Comment on Creation of a Spectrum Sharing
Innovation Test-Bed, ET*

*Docket No. 06-89*

 

I firmly support encouraging federal and non-federal users to develop
new ways to share spectrum. Indeed, I have great faith in our nation's
engineers and inventors, who have consistently found ways to extract
ever greater value from a fixed quantity of spectrum. Given this
admirable record of innovation -- awe-inspiring is not too strong a word
-- I believe it would be irresponsible for us *not* to investigate the
questions we raise today.

I do have some concern, however, about the fact that we are initiating
this process two years after the Commerce Department's
recommendation.[^5] I hope that our late start will not prevent us from
meeting the June 2008 recommended deadline for delivering a report
outlining the results of this program and suggesting appropriate
expansions.[^6]

**STATEMENT OF**

**COMMISSIONER JONATHAN S. ADELSTEIN**

*Re: Federal Communications Commission Seeks Public Comment on Creation
of a Spectrum Sharing Innovation Test Bed; ET Docket No. 06-89*

I am very pleased that we finally are moving forward with the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) on seeking
comment for the creation of a joint test bed. A test bed can be
invaluable for considering new methods for sharing spectrum and other
important spectrum management issues in the coming years. As I have said
recently, it is so important that the Commission do what it can to keep
on the leading edge of spectrum-based technology and policy.

Over the past few years, a lot of creative proposals have grown out of
the task force work from both NTIA and the Commission, through the
Spectrum Policy Task Force. I want to make sure that sharing proposals
and other forward-thinking spectrum policy considerations are fully
taken into account during the creation and development of the spectrum
test bed. A test bed also will be an important vehicle for considering
and developing new spectrum management innovations for federal and
non-federal use and operations in the future.

[^1]: The NTIA serves as the President's principal adviser on
    telecommunication and information policies and as manager of the
    federal government's use of the radio spectrum. 47 U.S.C. §
    902(b)(2).

[^2]: NTIA is also soliciting comments on many of these same issues
    through a Notice of Inquiry, President's Spectrum Policy Initiative
    -- Spectrum Sharing Innovation Test Bed, released June 8, 2006.

[^3]: *Presidential Memorandum on Spectrum Policy for the 21st Century,*
    69 Fed. Reg. 1568 (January 6, 2004).

[^4]: *Spectrum Policy for the 21^st^ Century -- The President's
    Spectrum Policy Initiative: Report 1 Recommendations of the Federal
    Government Spectrum Task Force (Recommendation 11)* and *Spectrum
    Policy for the 21^st^ Century -- The President's Spectrum Policy
    Initiative: Report 2 Recommendations From State and Local
    Governments and Private Sector Responders (Recommendation 6(b))*,
    NTIA, U.S. Department of Commerce (June 2004), available at
    [http://www.ntia.doc.gov/reports.html/](http://www.ntia.doc.gov/reports.html)

[^5]: *See* *Spectrum Policy for the 21^st^ Century -- The President's
    Spectrum Policy Initiative: Report 1 (Recommendation 11)*, U.S.
    Department of Commerce (2004), available at
    <http://www.ntia.doc.gov/reports/specpolini/presspecpolini_report1_06242004.htm>.

[^6]: *Id.*