**Before the**

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, D.C. 20554**

In the Matter of )

)

Redesignation of the 17.7-19.7 GHz Frequency )

Band, Blanket Licensing of Satellite ) IB Docket No. 98-172

Earth Stations in the 17.7-20.2 GHz and ) RM-9005

27.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Bands, ) RM-9118

and the Allocation of Additional Spectrum )

in the 17.3-17.8 GHz and 24.75-25.25 GHz )

Frequency Bands for Broadcast )

Satellite-Service Use )

**REPORT AND ORDER**

Adopted: June 8, 2000 Released: June 22, 2000

By the Commission: Commissioner Furchtgott-Roth approving in part,
dissenting in part and issuing a statement.

**TABLE OF CONTENTS**

Paragraph

I. INTRODUCTION 1

II\. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3

III\. BACKGROUND 8

IV\. DISCUSSION 17

A. Band Plan 18

1\. Initial Proposals 18

2\. Adopted Band Plan 28

3\. Secondary Use 55

4\. Conclusions Regarding the Band Plan 59

B.  Continued Rights of

> Existing Stations to Operate 61

1\. Cut-off Date 65

2\. Sunset provision 67

3\. Modifications 73

C. Relocation 76

D. Blanket Licensing 85

1\. GSO/FSS 87

2\. NSGO/FSS 95

E. BSS Allocation 96

F. 4.5 Degree Spacing 100

G. 24.75-25.25 GHz Uplink 102

V. PROCEDURAL INFORMATION 107

VI\. ORDERING CLAUSES 109

APPENDIX A: FINAL RULES

APPENDIX B: FINAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS

APPENDIX C: LIST OF COMMENTS AND REPLY COMMENTS

# INTRODUCTION

1.  With this *Report and Order*, we adopt rules that will permit the
    efficient use of spectrum for existing and future users, and will
    facilitate the deployment of new services in the 17.7-20.2 GHz band
    (\"18 GHz band\"). In particular, we adopt a band plan that
    designates how terrestrial fixed services, the Geostationary
    Satellite Orbit Fixed Satellite Service ("GSO/FSS"), the
    Non-Geostationary Satellite Orbit Fixed-Satellite Service
    ("NGSO/FSS"), and Mobile-Satellite Service feeder links ("MSS/FL")
    are to share this band. As a consequence of this designation, this
    *Report and Order* modifies the Table of Frequency Allocations found
    in Section 2.106 of the Commission's Rules.[^1] This *Report and
    Order* also modifies service rules in the 18 GHz band and authorizes
    the blanket licensing of satellite earth stations in the bands where
    the Fixed Satellite Service ("FSS") is the sole primary designation.
    Finally, this *Report and Order* allocates the band 17.3-17.7 GHz to
    the Broadcasting-Satellite Service ("BSS") and the band 24.75-25.25
    GHz to the FSS for BSS feeder links, as described below.

2.  The 18 GHz band currently serves a variety of communications needs
    and has the potential to provide consumers, both business and
    residential, with exciting new services in the years to come. Our
    actions in this proceeding will allow for more efficient use of this
    spectrum. Previously, the entire 18 GHz band was allocated for
    shared use among various terrestrial fixed and mobile services, the
    FSS, and the mobile satellite service ("MSS").[^2] We conclude that,
    in general, separating terrestrial fixed service operations from
    ubiquitously deployed FSS earth stations in dedicated sub-bands
    would serve the public interest. We also conclude, however, that
    limited frequency sharing between satellite and terrestrial services
    is feasible and should continue to be permitted where it serves the
    requirements of these services. We have attempted to protect the
    existing fixed terrestrial operations in this band to the maximum
    extent possible, while at the same time providing for the growth of
    both satellite and terrestrial services. This *Report and Order*
    should assist both the satellite and terrestrial services in the
    analysis of future growth possibilities by providing certainty as to
    how these services may share the 18 GHz band and thereby enabling
    the affected industries to make informed business decisions.

# EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

3.  The band plan we adopt today is a result of an examination of the
    record, developed in response to our *18 GHz NPRM* (or
    "*NPRM*").[^3] We have considered the concerns expressed in the
    parties' comments and have fashioned our decisions to resolve those
    concerns in as equitable a manner as possible.

4.  In the band plan we adopt today, we designate the following spectrum
    for **terrestrial fixed service use**: (1) 17.7-18.3 GHz band on a
    primary basis; (2) 18.3-18.58 GHz band on a co-primary basis (with
    GSO/FSS); and (3) 19.3-19.7 GHz band on a co-primary basis (with
    MSS/FL). We designate the following spectrum for **GSO/FSS service
    use**: (1) 18.58-18.8 GHz band on a primary basis; and (2)
    18.3-18.58 GHz band on a co-primary basis(with terrestrial fixed
    service), noting that the 19.7-20.2 GHz band is also allocated on a
    primary basis to the GSO/FSS. Furthermore, we designate the
    18.8-19.3 GHz band to **NGSO/FSS service use** on a primary basis,
    and retain co-primary status for **MSS/FL** (with terrestrial fixed
    service) in the 19.3-19.7 GHz band. These designations will
    significantly reduce sharing in the 18 GHz band, and thereby
    eliminate the need for many existing coordination procedures,[^4]
    leading to lower transaction costs and more efficient use of the
    band. We note that United States Government systems are authorized
    to operate in the 17.8‑20.2 GHz band in accordance with footnote
    US334 in the United States Table of Frequency Allocations and that
    coordination between non‑Government operations, both terrestrial and
    satellite, and these Government operations will continue to remain
    in effect. Nothing in this *Report and Order* purports to change the
    relationship between Government and non-Government systems.[^5]

5.  Recognizing the importance of existing terrestrial fixed service
    systems in the\
    18 GHz band, we will permit terrestrial fixed stations currently
    operating in spectrum being designated in this *Report and Order*
    for exclusive satellite use to continue to operate on a co-primary
    basis for a period of ten years, subject to the overriding right of
    satellite providers to require terrestrial fixed stations to
    relocate. During this ten-year period, existing terrestrial fixed
    stations can be compelled to relocate in accordance with relocation
    procedures adopted herein. If a terrestrial fixed station is
    required to relocate within ten years of the effective date of this
    *Report and Order*, the satellite provider must pay to relocate the
    terrestrial fixed station to comparable facilities. At the end of
    the ten-year period, existing terrestrial fixed stations may
    continue to operate on a non-interference basis. In the case of
    19.26-19.30 GHz, the co-primary status of existing terrestrial fixed
    stations, as well as their entitlement to relocation costs, is
    permanent.

6.  This *Report and Order* also authorizes a blanket licensing regime
    for satellite earth stations for segments of the 17.7- 20.2 GHz and
    27.5-30.0 GHz frequency bands---bands not subject to sharing with
    other services. Specifically, we will accept such applications for
    blanket licensing in the 18.58-18.8 GHz, 18.8-19.3 GHz, 19.7-20.2
    GHz, 28.35-28.6 GHz, 28.6-29.1 GHz, and 29.5-30.0 GHz frequency
    bands.[^6] In all those bands designated as primary to the GSO/FSS,
    we adopt the specific technical conditions concerning space station
    and earth station performance recommended by the Blanket Licensing
    Industry Working Group to ensure that intra-system interference
    stays within acceptable levels. With respect to the blanket
    licensing of NGSO/FSS systems, we adopt an equation to determine the
    power-flux density (pfd) of space stations that, for low elevation
    angles, includes a consideration of the number of satellites in the
    NGSO system constellation, which was recommended by technical study
    groups of the Radiocommunications Sector of the International
    Telecommunication Union (ITU-R) for inclusion in the ITU's Radio
    Regulations. The blanket licensing regime adopted in this *Report
    and Order* describes the parameters within which earth stations may
    be operated under a blanket license, as well as the solutions for
    minimizing potential interference on both an intra- and
    inter-service basis.

7.  This *Report and Order* also allocates 400 *MHz* of spectrum at
    17.3-17.7 GHz for primary BSS uses, effective April 1, 2007, as
    specified in the ITU Radio Regulations. We allocate the 24.75-25.05
    GHz band for primary GSO/FSS (Earth-to-space) use, limited to feeder
    links for the BSS in the 17.3-17.7 GHz band, and the GSO/FSS
    25.05-25.25 GHz band for co-primary use between the FSS
    (Earth-to-space), limited to BSS feeder links, and the fixed
    service, comprised of the 24 GHz Service.[^7]

# BACKGROUND

8.  In response to the *18 GHz NPRM*, we received numerous comments and
    reply comments from entities representing a broad cross-section of
    the communications industry.[^8] The majority of the commenters
    recognized that sharing between terrestrial fixed service and
    satellite services in the 18 GHz band is not possible where
    satellite earth stations are ubiquitously deployed.[^9] Thus, a
    majority of the commenters agreed with the Commission's tentative
    conclusion in the *18 GHz NPRM* that the public interest is best
    served by separating terrestrial fixed service operations from the
    operations of non-government ubiquitously deployed FSS earth
    stations into dedicated sub-bands.[^10] Many of these same
    commenters, however, have requested that their respective services
    be designated a greater amount of spectrum than the spectrum
    allocated by this *Report and Order* today.

9.  The 17.7-19.7 GHz frequency band is currently allocated for
    terrestrial fixed service, FSS downlinks (both Geostationary Orbit
    and Non-Geostationary Orbit), and for feeder links to the MSS.[^11]
    In 1996, the Commission adopted a band designation plan for the 28
    GHz band and the 18 GHz band to accommodate the needs of competing
    terrestrial fixed and satellite services.[^12] In the *28 GHz First
    Report and Order*, the Commission concluded that "co-frequency
    sharing between either GSO/FSS or NGSO/FSS ubiquitously deployed
    terminals and LMDS (Local Multipoint Distribution Service) with its
    ubiquitously deployed subscriber terminals, is not feasible at this
    time."[^13] As a result, the 28 GHz band plan eliminated
    co-frequency sharing except for those segments where sharing was
    technically feasible. In addressing the 18 GHz band, however, the
    designation plan of the *28 GHz First Report and Order* mandated
    that terrestrial services and satellite services share segments of
    the band, though the Commission noted that the record demonstrates
    that such co-frequency sharing presents multiple challenges.

10. The band plan adopted in the *28 GHz First Report and Order* is as
    follows:[^14]

UPLINK BAND (28GHz)

+----------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
| LMDS     | GSO/FSS  | NGSO/FSS  | MSS/FL    | MSS/FL    | GSO/FSS   |
|          |          |           |           |           |           |
| fss      | ngso/fss | gso/fss   | and       | and       | ngso/fss  |
|          |          |           |           |           |           |
| 850 MHz  | 250 MHz  | 500 MHz   | LMDS      | GSO/      | 500 MHz   |
|          |          |           |           |           |           |
|          |          |           | 150 MHz   | FSS       |           |
|          |          |           |           |           |           |
|          |          |           |           | 250 MHz   |           |
+----------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+

27.5 28.35 28.6 29.1 29.25 29.5 30.0 GHz

DOWNLINK BAND (18GHz)

+--------------------------+---------------+------------+------------+
| GSO/FSS\                 | NGSO/FSS\     | MSS/FL\    | GSO/FSS    |
| and\                     | and\          | and\       |            |
| FS[^15]                  | FS            | FS         | ngso/fss   |
|                          |               |            |            |
| ngso/fss                 | gso/fss       | gso/fss    | 500 MHz    |
|                          |               |            |            |
| 1100 MHz                 | 500 MHz       | 400 MHz    |            |
+--------------------------+---------------+------------+------------+

17.7 18.8 19.3 19.7 20.2 GHz

As depicted above, prior to this rulemaking, the 18 GHz band was
designated for use as follows: the 17.7-18.8 GHz band for co-primary use
by GSO/FSS and terrestrial fixed service; the 18.8-19.3 GHz band for
co-primary use by NGSO/FSS and terrestrial fixed service; the 19.3-19.7
GHz band for co-primary use by MSS/FL and terrestrial fixed service; and
the 19.7-20.2 GHz band for primary use by GSO/FSS.

11. Since the adoption of the *28 GHz First Report and Order*, several
    factors have led us to conclude that co-frequency sharing between
    terrestrial fixed service and ubiquitously deployed FSS earth
    stations in the 18 GHz band is generally infeasible. [^16] For
    instance, we expect use of the 18 GHz band by both terrestrial fixed
    services and FSS systems to increase dramatically over the next few
    years. Currently there are approximately 179,000 terrestrial fixed
    links in the 18 GHz band. Use of the band is expected to increase as
    terrestrial fixed services migrate from congested lower bands and as
    18 GHz band systems expand. Although there currently are no
    non-government[^17] FSS systems in operation in the 18 GHz band, we
    have granted thirteen GSO/FSS licenses[^18] and one NGSO/FSS
    license[^19] to launch and operate Ka-band FSS systems in the near
    future. The expected increase in 18 GHz band use in the years to
    come, as well as the desire on the part of the FSS industry to
    implement blanket licensing of ubiquitously deployed satellite earth
    stations, led us to conclude in the *NPRM* that, under most
    circumstances, sharing between terrestrial fixed service and FSS
    operations will become increasingly difficult and is therefore not
    feasible on a going-forward basis.

12. In the *NPRM*, we tentatively concluded "that the public interest is
    best served by separating terrestrial fixed service operations from
    the operations of non-government ubiquitously deployed FSS earth
    stations into dedicated sub-bands."[^20] To this end, the *NPRM*
    proposed four band redesignation plans.[^21] We recognized that
    redesignation of the 18 GHz band may have an adverse effect on
    existing terrestrial fixed service systems currently operating in
    the band. To alleviate any adverse effects on existing systems, the
    *NPRM* proposed to "grandfather" licensed terrestrial operations in
    the band, along with applications that were pending as of September
    18, 1998.[^22] The *NPRM* asked for comments on the proposed
    redesignation plans and the "grandfathering" provision. We also
    requested comments on conditions under which relocation of existing
    terrestrial fixed systems may be necessary notwithstanding such
    proposed "grandfathering," and the terms of such relocation.[^23]

13. In early November 1998, as a response to the cut-off date for the
    grandfathering proposed in the *18 GHz NPRM*, the Fixed
    Point-to-Point Communications Section, Wireless Communications
    Division of the Telecommunications Industry Association ("TIA-Fixed
    Section") and the Independent Cable & Telecommunications Association
    ("ICTA") filed petitions for relief from implementation of the
    September 18, 1998 "cut-off" date.[^24] TIA-Fixed Section argued
    that the cut-off date proposed in the *NPRM* constituted a *de
    facto* freeze on further development of affected terrestrial fixed
    service in the 18 GHz band, while ICTA argued that private cable
    operators ("PCOs") would not be able to survive should the cut-off
    date be adopted.

14. On February 5, 1999, the Commission adopted an *Order (18 GHz Relief
    Order)* in response to the two petitions,[^25] modifying our
    proposal so that the PCO applications in the 18.3-18.55 GHz band
    would be considered co-primary with the FSS if filed before the
    release of this *Report and Order*.[^26] We did not, however, change
    the proposed cut-off date for other non-PCO terrestrial fixed
    operations in the 18.3-18.55 GHz band and 18.8-19.3 GHz band. The
    *18 GHz Relief Order* left the final determination regarding the
    cut-off date and grandfathered status for all terrestrial fixed
    services for resolution in this *Report and Order*.[^27]

15. In the *18 GHz NPRM*, we proposed to implement a blanket licensing
    procedure that would allow Ka-band FSS earth stations to operate
    under a single system license in bands that are designated for their
    primary use. The Commission tentatively concluded that such a
    blanket licensing procedure would provide an efficient means for
    licensing the vast number of small antenna FSS earth stations
    expected to be deployed in the Ka-band.[^28] We also proposed that
    blanket license applicants be required to designate a point of
    contact to provide secondary users with a means to obtain
    information on the location and frequency use of satellite earth
    stations so that they could avoid causing harmful interference.
    Furthermore, the *NPRM* proposed a requirement for blanket licensees
    to report to the Commission on the number of satellite earth
    stations brought into service annually.[^29]

16. In the *NPRM*, in response to a Petition for Rulemaking filed by
    DIRECTV Enterprises, Inc. ("DIRECTV"),[^30] we proposed to allocate
    the 17.3-17.8 GHz band to BSS and the 24.75-25.25 GHz band for BSS
    feeder link use, with implementation of these allocations effective
    April 1, 2007.[^31]

# DISCUSSION

17. The vast majority of commenters agreed with our tentative conclusion
    that co-frequency sharing between terrestrial fixed service and
    ubiquitously deployed FSS earth stations in the 18 GHz band is not
    feasible, and that the public interest would be best served by
    separating these operations into dedicated sub-bands.[^32] We
    continue to believe that separation of these operations into
    different dedicated sub-bands is an effective frequency management
    technique to resolve problems of coordinating terrestrial fixed
    service links with ubiquitously deployed satellite earth
    stations.[^33] As Teledesic notes, band segmentation, in conjunction
    with our blanket-licensing regime, "will allow for ubiquitous
    deployment of GSO and NGSO satellite earth terminals, and for much
    denser deployment of terrestrial fixed stations than would otherwise
    be possible."[^34] While we generally agree with this principle, we
    have found it impossible to satisfy the full requirements of all of
    the services wishing to operate in the 18 GHz band through strict
    adherence to the principle of band segmentation. Although sharing
    between ubiquitously deployed FSS earth stations and terrestrial
    fixed stations clearly is not feasible, we have developed a band
    segmentation plan that would also provide for non-ubiquitously
    deployed FSS earth stations on a co-primary basis with the
    terrestrial fixed service on a coordinated basis. To that end, we
    have constructed a band plan that includes some co-primary
    designations. We find that this approach best serves the public
    interest, providing the various services with a form of access to
    the frequency spectrum that is both feasible and functional. We now
    discuss our initial redesignated band plan proposals and adopt a
    final band plan.

## Band Plan 

### Initial Proposals

18. The band plans proposed in the *NPRM* resulted from extensive public
    comment that focused on the identification of the spectrum
    requirements of the different services authorized to operate in the
    18 GHz band. In developing specific band redesignation proposals, we
    proceeded with the goal of striking a balance between meeting the
    spectrum requirements of the different services while best serving
    the public interest. In the *NPRM*, we tentatively concluded that
    the proposed band redesignation plans ensure continued development
    of terrestrial fixed service and FSS in the 18 GHz band and
    efficient use of this spectrum.[^35]

19. [Primary Proposal.]{.underline} The *18 GHz NPRM* proposed the
    following band plan:

+------------+----------+----------+-----------+---------+----------+
| FS[^36]    | GSO/FSS  | GSO/FSS  | NGSO/FSS  | MSS/FL  | GSO/FSS  |
|            |          |          |           |         |          |
| gso/fss &  | fs &     | &        | fs &      | &       | ngso/fss |
| ngso/fss   | ngso/fss |          | gso/fss   |         |          |
|            |          | FS       |           | FS      | 500 MHz  |
| 600 MHz    | 250 MHz  |          | 500 MHz   |         |          |
|            |          | ngso/fss |           | gso/fss |          |
|            |          |          |           |         |          |
|            |          | 250 MHz  |           | 400 MHz |          |
+------------+----------+----------+-----------+---------+----------+

17.7 18.3 18.55 18.8 19.3 19.7 20.2 GHz

20. As shown above, the Commission proposed in the *NPRM* to designate
    to terrestrial fixed service 600 *MHz* of spectrum for primary use
    at 17.7-18.3 GHz. The Commission also proposed designation for the
    terrestrial fixed service of 650 *MHz* of spectrum for co-primary
    use at 18.55-18.8 GHz (with GSO/FSS) and 19.3-19.7 GHz (with
    MSS/FL).[^37] The Commission further proposed to designate to
    GSO/FSS 250 *MHz* of spectrum at 18.3-18.55 for primary use and an
    additional 250 *MHz* of spectrum for co-primary use at
    18.55-18.8.[^38] The Commission also proposed to designate 500 *MHz*
    of spectrum at 18.8-19.3 GHz for primary use by NGSO/FSS.[^39]
    Finally, the *NPRM* proposed that MSS/FL would retain the 400 *MHz*
    of spectrum at 19.3-19.7 on a co-primary basis.[^40]

21. Although most of the commenters supported our tentative conclusion
    that redesignation of the 18 GHz band into dedicated sub-bands is
    generally desirable, few commenters supported our primary proposal.
    The terrestrial fixed service industry generally argued that the
    primary proposal significantly reduced the spectrum available to
    their services and threatened their continued viability.[^41] The
    FSS commenters argued that the proposed band plan failed to provide
    the necessary 1000 *MHz* of unencumbered, primary spectrum.[^42] We
    fully discuss the primary proposal in our adoption of the final band
    plan below. We first, however, discuss the modified proposals put
    forth in the *18 GHz NPRM*.

22. [Alternative Proposal.]{.underline} Along with the primary proposal,
    we requested that interested parties comment on the desirability of
    modifying our primary proposal by designating an additional 100
    *MHz* at 18.3-18.4 GHz to be shared by terrestrial fixed service and
    GSO/FSS on a co-primary basis.[^43] We stated that such a
    designation would give terrestrial fixed service 700 *MHz* of
    contiguous spectrum (17.7-18.4), possibly making it easier to design
    a more flexible channelization plan for terrestrial fixed service.

23. Most of the comments addressing this modified proposal argue against
    its adoption. The Spectrum & Orbit Utilization Section of the
    Satellite Communications Division of the Telecommunications Industry
    Association (TIA-SOUS) argues that the Commission should reject this
    proposal because it goes against the basic premise of this
    proceeding.[^44] TIA-SOUS cites consensus among terrestrial fixed
    service, FSS, and the Commission to support the assertion that
    sharing is not feasible. Loral Space & Communications Ltd. ("Loral")
    also strongly opposes designating an additional 100 *MHz* of
    spectrum in the 18.3-18.4 GHz band.[^45] SBC Communications Inc.
    ("SBC") argues that an additional 100 MHz of spectrum may provide
    relief for terrestrial fixed service; SBC, however, does not
    sufficiently support how this would be the case.[^46] We agree with
    the assessment of both TIA-SOUS and Loral, that adding an additional
    100 MHz of co-primary spectrum to terrestrial fixed service in the
    18.3-18.4 GHz segment would frustrate the desire to separate
    terrestrial fixed service from ubiquitously deployed satellite earth
    stations.[^47] This designation under the modified proposal is moot,
    however, considering our decision to designate the entire 280 MHz of
    spectrum at 18.3-18.58 GHz to be shared among terrestrial fixed
    service and non-blanket-licensed GSO/FSS, on a co-primary
    basis.[^48] Therefore, we reject our modified proposal that would
    have designated an additional 100 MHz of spectrum on a co-primary
    basis to terrestrial fixed service and GSO/FSS in the 18.3-18.4 GHz
    band.

24. The *18 GHz NPRM* also sought comment on designating the entire
    17.7-18.8 GHz band to be shared on a co-primary basis by terrestrial
    fixed service and GSO/FSS.[^49] We proposed this band plan on the
    assumption that it may be possible for GSO/FSS to use gateway type
    terminals throughout the 17.7-18.8 GHz band, allowing for continued
    sharing.

25. Although none of the commenters directly supported this band plan or
    our assumptions about the use of gateways throughout the 17.7-18.8
    GHz band, Comsearch articulated a similar sharing proposal.
    Specifically, Comsearch proposed that the Commission allocate the
    17.7-18.55 GHz band on a co-primary basis to GSO/FSS and terrestrial
    fixed service.[^50] Comsearch argued that maintaining a co-primary
    designation in the 17.7-18.55 GHz band allows for the continued
    viability of those systems currently utilizing the existing 1560 MHz
    frequency separation for wideband two-way terrestrial fixed service
    operations and Cable Television Relay Service ("CARS") or Private
    Cable 6 MHz channels.[^51]

26. Airtouch argues that the Comsearch proposal is unacceptable because
    it requires terrestrial operations to lose the only primary
    allocation to terrestrial fixed services provided by the Commission
    in our primary proposal.[^52] Airtouch correctly points out that if
    adopted, the Comsearch proposal would result in the loss of access
    to 750 MHz of previously co-primary spectrum for terrestrial fixed
    service operations, with no primary designation for FS.[^53] FWCC
    also rejects the proposal put forth by Comsearch.[^54] FWCC argues
    that the co-primary allocation at 17.7-18.55 GHz proves to be a
    serious defect in Comsearch's proposed band plan because the record
    in this proceeding generally reflects the notion that terrestrial
    fixed service operations cannot share spectrum with ubiquitously
    deployed GSO/FSS earth stations. In fact, Comsearch admits this much
    to be true.[^55] We agree with Airtouch and FWCC. Mandating
    terrestrial fixed service operations to continue to share the entire
    17.7-18.55 GHz band, as proposed by Comsearch, is inequitable, as it
    allows FSS systems full use of the band while taking 750 MHz of
    co-primary spectrum from the terrestrial fixed service. We also have
    concerns about the feasibility of sharing between the services in
    parts of this band. The record clearly reflects that sharing between
    ubiquitously deployed satellite earth stations and terrestrial fixed
    service is not technically or operationally feasible because fixed
    stations would constrain the locations at which earth stations could
    be successfully operated; thus, under the Comsearch proposal,
    satellite users would not be able to use this band for
    blanket-licensed earth stations.[^56] For the aforementioned
    reasons, and due to insufficient support in the record for either
    our modified proposal or the Comsearch proposal, we reject both
    proposals to maintain a co-primary allocation for FSS and
    terrestrial fixed service in the 17.7-18.8 GHz band as inconsistent
    with the public interest.

27. Finally, we requested comment on the feasibility of retaining our
    current band plan, which would provide for continued sharing in the
    entire 17.7-19.7 band.[^57] As previously stated, the overwhelming
    majority of commenters believe that segmenting the 18 GHz band
    between terrestrial fixed service and FSS operations is
    necessary.[^58] We agree with the wealth of commenters that
    supported segmentation and for the reasons stated above we reject
    this proposal.

### Adopted Band Plan

28. This *Report and Order* adopts the following band plan and amends
    the Table of Frequency Allocations accordingly:

+-----------+---------+---------+-------------+---------+------------+
| FS        | GSO     | GSO/FSS | NG          | MSS/FL  | GS         |
|           | /FSS&FS |         | SO/FSS[^59] |         | O/FSS[^60] |
| 600 MHz   |         | 220 MHz |             | &       |            |
|           | 280 MHz |         | 500 MHz     |         | 500 MHz    |
|           |         |         |             | FS      |            |
|           |         |         |             |         |            |
|           |         |         |             | 400 MHz |            |
+-----------+---------+---------+-------------+---------+------------+

17.7 18.3 18.58 18.8 19.3 19.7 20.2 GHz

Under the band plan the Commission is adopting, 600 MHz at 17.7-18.3 GHz
is designated for primary use by terrestrial fixed service operations
and 680 MHz of co-primary spectrum from the 18.3-18.58 GHz band (with
GSO/FSS) and 19.3-19.7 GHz band (with MSS/FL), for a total of 1280 MHz
of available spectrum for FS. We designate 220 MHz to GSO/FSS for
primary use in the 18.58-18.8 GHz band, and 280 MHz for co-primary use
in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band (with terrestrial fixed service), for a total
of 500 MHz of available spectrum for GSO/FSS.[^61] We designate 500 MHz
of primary spectrum to NGSO/FSS at 18.8-19.3 GHz. Finally, we retain the
allocation of 400 MHz of spectrum at 19.3-19.7 GHz to MSS/FL on a
co-primary basis (with terrestrial fixed service). We further note that
NTIA has stated that the Government currently operates both GSO and NGSO
satellite networks in the band 17.8‑20.2 GHz and that they plan for
these operations to continue in this band indefinitely.[^62]

29. The band plan we adopt today differs from the primary proposal
    articulated in the *18 GHz NPRM* in several ways intended to address
    the concerns expressed in the record. First, to ensure the continued
    viability of many existing terrestrial systems, we upgrade the
    secondary allocation proposed for terrestrial fixed service in the
    18.3-18.58 GHz band to co-primary status. Thus, the CARS, PCO and
    other services now using a contiguous block of spectrum in the
    18.14-18.58 GHz band will continue to be able to use this spectrum
    without dividing their operations into two band segments, as
    proposed in the *NPRM*. Second, to further the needs of GSO/FSS
    licensees in the 18 GHz band, we eliminate the co-primary allocation
    to terrestrial fixed service in the 18.58-18.8 GHz band, resulting
    in a primary, albeit smaller, designation for GSO/FSS in this band
    segment. Finally, we decline to allow new secondary operations on a
    non-interference basis, by either the terrestrial fixed service or
    the FSS, throughout the 17.7-19.7 GHz band, as discussed further
    below.

30. A review of the record leads us to conclude that this redesignated
    band plan results in an equitable and balanced approach to meeting
    the needs of the various existing and future operations in the 18
    GHz band. We recognize that the adopted band plan does not provide a
    full 1000 Megahertz of unshared Ka-band downlink spectrum for
    GSO/FSS operations, as has been requested by many GSO/FSS licensees.
    Nevertheless, we believe that the 720 MHz of unshared downlink
    spectrum at 18.58-18.8 GHz and 19.7-20.2, plus the flexible rules
    that permit sharing of 280 megahertz at 18.3-18.58 GHz, should
    provide a reasonable basis for GSO/FSS operations to be undertaken.
    While we realize the some GSO/FSS systems have already been
    designed, we expect that the current system designs of the GSO/FSS
    systems can proceed with some modification or that sharing
    agreements can be reached to permit the use of these designs.
    Moreover, we note that the same total capacity for GSO/FSS services
    is still available in locations where coordination can be achieved.
    We conclude that this plan will, through the judicious choice of
    band segments subject to co-primary sharing, significantly lower any
    consequential administrative costs of coordination. Furthermore,
    this plan goes a long way toward facilitating the deployment of new
    services by designating different dedicated sub-bands for
    ubiquitously deployed FSS earth stations and nearly ubiquitous
    terrestrial fixed services in the 18 GHz band, thereby serving the
    public interest. [^63] A brief discussion on the designation of each
    band follows.

31. [17.7-18.3 GHz Frequency Band]{.underline}. We designate the
    17.7-18.3 GHz frequency band to terrestrial fixed service for
    primary use. Prior to this rulemaking, this segment of the 18 GHz
    band was designated for shared co-primary use between GSO/FSS and
    terrestrial fixed service operations. Currently, the 17.7-18.3 GHz
    band is used for a wide variety of common carrier, mass media, and
    private fixed terrestrial point-to-point or point-to-multipoint
    services, as described in Parts 74, 78 and 101 of the Commission's
    Rules. In designating the 17.7-18.3 GHz band for primary use by
    terrestrial fixed service operators, we recognize that this is an
    important segment of the 18 GHz band for existing and future
    terrestrial fixed service operations. We achieve our stated goal of
    ensuring the continued viability of the terrestrial fixed service by
    avoiding any future interference from space stations and the need to
    relocate stations to protect future earth stations. The
    redesignation of this band to primary status will also generally
    facilitate the relocation of terrestrial fixed service operations
    from other parts of the 17.7-19.7 MHz or other frequency bands by
    eliminating the need for coordination with satellite earth stations.
    It will also facilitate the deployment of new terrestrial fixed
    stations by eliminating coordination requirements between the fixed
    and fixed satellite services, thereby lowering transaction costs for
    terrestrial fixed operators.

32. Commenters generally agreed that this part of the spectrum should be
    allocated to terrestrial fixed service on a primary basis. ABC, Inc.
    was especially supportive of this designation in stating that the
    allocation "properly recognizes the importance of existing
    terrestrial fixed service operations."[^64] Other commenters either
    expressly requested a primary designation to terrestrial fixed
    service in the 17.7-18.3 GHz band or implicitly did so by failing to
    suggest that we modify this portion of the band while specifically
    requesting that we change other segments of the 18 GHz band.[^65]

33. Comsearch and Hughes request that we designate portions of the
    17.7-18.3 GHz band for services other than terrestrial fixed service
    on a primary basis.[^66] Comsearch's proposal would make no change
    from the current service designations and Hughes' proposal would
    redesignate spectrum currently used for several types of fixed
    service, including PCO's operating in the 18.14-18.58 GHz band. We
    reject both proposals in part, noting that a primary designation to
    the fixed service below 18.3 GHz is necessary to ensure that
    terrestrial fixed stations, including those 18 GHz stations that may
    be required to relocate pursuant to this *Report and Order*, will
    have access to a sufficient amount of spectrum. The Hughes proposal
    fails to recognize the increasing demand the terrestrial fixed
    service will place upon this part of the spectrum as well as the
    vast numbers of wideband CARS, PCO and other services already
    operating in the 18.14-18.58 GHz band. We believe that this portion
    of the 18 GHz band is vital to the success of fixed station
    relocation efforts and the continued viability of wireless cable
    providers that provide direct competition to traditional cable
    operators. Furthermore, we have previously recognized that there is
    currently no other spectrum available either in the 18 GHz band or
    any other band at the present time to accommodate adequately
    existing or future PCO operations needed to meet consumer
    demand.[^67] For these reasons, we designate the 17.7-18.3 GHz band
    for primary terrestrial fixed use and reject Comsearch and Hughes'
    proposals to designate portions of the 17.7-18.3 band to anything
    other than terrestrial fixed service on a primary basis. .

34. [18.3-18.58 GHz and 18.58-18.8 GHz Frequency Bands]{.underline}. We
    designate the 18.3-18.58 GHz frequency band for co-primary shared
    use by terrestrial fixed service and GSO/FSS operations. In revising
    our band plan as discussed above, we decline to adopt the portion of
    our *18 GHz NPRM* proposal that would designate 250 MHz of spectrum
    at 18.3-18.55 GHz to GSO/FSS on a primary basis. We conclude that
    the proposal would place in jeopardy the viability of the extremely
    large number of fixed stations, CARS, wireless PCOs and other
    links[^68] operating in this band. We also conclude that GSO/FSS
    licensees would have a difficult time implementing ubiquitous earth
    stations in this segment due to the large number of terrestrial
    fixed services currently operating in this band.[^69] To help meet
    the spectrum needs of GSO/FSS, we designate the 220 MHz of spectrum
    at 18.58-18.8 GHz for primary use by GSO/FSS. In adopting this
    redesignation, we eliminate the co-primary terrestrial fixed service
    allocation present before this *Report and Order* and proposed in
    the *18 GHz NPRM*. We revisit the designation as put forth in our
    primary proposal as a result of compelling arguments from some of
    the commenters from both the terrestrial fixed service industry and
    the FSS industry, as discussed below.

35. In addressing the portion of our *18 GHz NPRM* primary proposal that
    designated the 18.3-18.55 GHz band to GSO/FSS on a primary basis,
    ICTA argued this designation would cause CARS and PCOs to lose the
    440 MHz of contiguous spectrum currently being employed to serve
    subscribers.[^70] If we were to designate the 18.3-18.55 GHz
    frequency band to GSO/FSS on a primary basis, cable operators would
    be unable to reasonably expand operations in this band to compete
    effectively with existing coaxial cable systems.[^71] The
    detrimental effect on PCOs from such a loss of spectrum is increased
    by the fact that there is currently no other spectrum available for
    such systems. GE American Communications, Inc. (GE Americom), in
    arguing that GSO/FSS should be designated 500 MHz of spectrum in the
    18.1-18.8 GHz range, also proposes that terrestrial services
    operating in these bands would be required to relocate.[^72] GE
    Americom, however, fails to recognize that there is currently no
    other available spectrum for PCOs. TIA-Fixed Section argues that
    requiring these point-to-multipoint one way video distribution
    services to relocate to the contiguous allocation for terrestrial
    fixed service in the 17.7-18.3 band would not work. Specifically,
    TIA-Fixed Section contends that relocating Multi-channel Video
    Programming Distribution services (MVPDs) into the 17.7-18.3 GHz
    band would require that these services share spectrum with fixed
    point-to-point links, a proposition that in reality is "virtually
    impossible due to the coordination difficulties between these
    services in the metropolitan areas where these services both
    reside."[^73] We agree. In fact, we have acknowledged that this
    difficulty in coordination is the primary reason that we have
    traditionally licensed point-to-multipoint operations and
    point-to-point terrestrial fixed service operations in separate
    portions of the 18 GHz band.[^74]

36. Furthermore, as KaStar notes in its comments, designating the
    18.3-18.55 GHz band to GSO/FSS on a primary basis would be
    unworkable for GSO/FSS as well. KaStar argues that GSO/FSS operators
    would have a difficult time deploying ubiquitous earth stations in
    this band because there are a large number of existing terrestrial
    fixed services that currently use this band in urban areas. [^75]
    These existing services would be maintained under the rules we adopt
    today. PanAmSat concurs and states that if we conclude that 750 MHz
    of spectrum is sufficient to meet the spectrum needs of GSO/FSS, we
    should not designate the 18.3-18.55 GHz band to fulfill 250 MHz of
    those needs.[^76] PanAmSat reasons that the reported wide deployment
    of CARS systems in that band would make it virtually impossible for
    the GSO/FSS industry to deploy ubiquitous small earth stations in
    the band, unless CARS systems were forced to relocate. Under the
    relocation rules we adopt today, such a mass relocation would prove
    costly to the GSO/FSS operators, possibly making it an unattractive
    band for such services and possibly slowing deployment of the
    advanced services such systems may bring to the public. We agree
    with this assessment of KaStar and PanAmSat. One of the goals of
    this proceeding is to limit the number of necessary, and possibly
    difficult, coordinations that must take place between ubiquitously
    deployed blanket licensed earth stations and terrestrial fixed
    service operations. We believe, however, that we should leave it to
    the satellite licensees to decide how the GSO/FSS service can best
    be deployed in shared bands, where only their stations are subject
    to interference. Furthermore, Teledesic argues that "both GSO FSS
    operators and FS operators would appear to benefit if the 250 MHz of
    GSO FSS 'gateway' spectrum ran from 18.3-18.55 GHz, rather than from
    18.55-18.8 GHz."[^77] Teledesic correctly states that terrestrial
    fixed services would benefit from the maintenance of 250 MHz of
    spectrum at 18.3-18.55 GHz, resulting in a larger contiguous block
    of spectrum than was proposed in the *NPRM*. Such a redesignation
    eliminates the possible need to relocate the numerous CARS and PCO
    operations currently using the 18.3-18.58 GHz band. It also affords
    PCOs the ability to maintain and upgrade their existing systems to
    compete effectively against franchised cable systems. In exchange
    for giving up primary status in the 18.3-18.55 GHz band, Teledesic
    proposes that we designate the 18.55-18.8 GHz band to GSO/FSS for
    primary status.[^78] This "swap" of band allocations is supported by
    several of the commenters.[^79]

37. Airtouch argues that foreclosing the fixed service in the 18.55-18.8
    GHz band is acceptable, due, in part, to the fact that the NGSO/FSS
    primary allocation at 18.8-19.3 GHz will be rendered unusable for
    future CARS services because the fixed service channels in the
    18.58-18.82 GHz band are paired with those in the 18.8-19.3 GHz
    band.[^80] Specifically, the narrowband allocation at 18.58-18.82
    GHz is paired for go/return use with the 18.92-19.16 GHz band, a
    band that, pursuant to this *Report and Order* is now designated for
    NGSO/FSS operations on a primary basis. AT&T Wireless similarly
    states that "\[I\]f the Commission reallocates the upper half of
    this go/return frequency band to secondary status, it eliminates the
    pairing capability and effectively eliminates the ability of fixed
    terrestrial service providers to use the lower half as well."[^81]

38. For this reason, inter alia, we see no need to maintain the
    co-primary status for terrestrial fixed services in the 18.58-18.8
    GHz band. Although this eliminates many, if not all, of the
    narrowband channels for terrestrial fixed services, we note that
    permitting continued operation on a short-term basis[^82] and
    rechannelization and relocation on a long-term basis should provide
    for the continued viability of these services. We discuss the issue
    of secondary designation later in this *Report and Order.*

39. Lockheed observes that we based our proposal to designate the
    18.55-18.8 GHz band for co-primary use by GSO/FSS and terrestrial
    fixed service on two factors. First, we noted that Lockheed and
    other GSO/FSS licensees planned to operate gateway earth stations
    utilizing large antennas that would allow sharing with terrestrial
    fixed service operations to continue; and second, we stated that the
    strict pfd limit applicable in the 18.6-18.8 GHz band to protect
    Earth Exploration-Satellite Service (EESS) and SR services would
    require the use of higher gain antennas, making sharing a
    possibility.[^83] Since the release of the *18 GHz NPRM*, however,
    Lockheed modified its initial application and in the Astrolink-Phase
    II™ System application expresses its intention to employ
    ubiquitously deployed small user terminals in the 18 GHz band.[^84]
    Furthermore, Lockheed notes that "the strict p.f.d. limit applicable
    to FSS operations in the 18.6-18.8 GHz band is under review within
    the United States and the ITU, and Lockheed Martin understands that
    it may become less stringent pursuant to an agreement reached among
    GSO FSS operators, the EESS community, and the U.S.
    government."[^85]

40. Both Bellsouth and TIA-Fixed Section argue that, should we designate
    the 18.3-18.55 GHz band for co-primary use by GSO/FSS and
    terrestrial fixed services, we should consider extending that
    designation 30 MHz to 18.58 GHz to maintain all of the available
    channels for CARS, PCO, and other MVPD use.[^86] Bellsouth states
    that "\[while\] MVPDs would retain co-primary status in the
    18.3-18.5 GHz portion, and would face somewhat fewer interference
    concerns, the 18.5-18.58 GHz band would still be lost to MVPDs under
    this alternative. Such a result is untenable."[^87] We agree.
    Multichannel video operators in the 18.142-18.58 GHz band are
    typically licensed for the full 440 megahertz of bandwidth and have
    the capability to provide 72 channels of video programming to all of
    their customers. These systems continue to require this capacity if
    they are to remain competitive with traditional cable systems and
    DBS. Additionally, when these systems eventually begin a transition
    to digital technologies, they will require the flexibility provided
    by this full bandwidth to make that transition with minimal impact
    on analog subscribers. Because these systems are providing
    essentially a \"consumer\" service, the transition to digital
    technologies will have to be phased in over time, requiring access
    to the full spectrum for some significant time into the future.
    Prior to and during this transition, existing multichannel video
    operators contend they require the ability to provide the full menu
    of programming if they are to be able to build their customer base
    and remain competitive with other providers of multi-channel video
    services. While the expansion of the band shared by terrestrial
    fixed and GSO/FSS systems from 18.3-18.55 GHz to 18.3-18.58 GHz will
    impose additional operational or design constraints on the licensees
    of GSO/FSS systems operating in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band, we believe
    that opportunities exist for the operators of FSS and terrestrial
    systems to reach private commercial agreements that will allow each
    service to meet its needs.[^88] We encourage such private agreements
    as the best method to accurately balance the various commercial
    interests in these bands. We find that ensuring the continued
    viability of the competitive multi-channel video systems in this
    portion of the spectrum necessitates providing for shared use of the
    spectrum up to 18.58 GHz. Furthermore, we believe that a commercial
    approach to resolving sharing in the 18.55-18.58 GHz band may allow
    for more innovative, spectrally-efficient solutions to be employed
    than would be possible if we provided sole primary access to this
    band to either the terrestrial fixed or GSO/FSS services.

41. In consideration of the above comments and industry agreement as
    noted *infra*, we conclude the following: (1) PCOs using the 18 GHz
    band, for both current and future operations, will not be able to
    compete effectively against franchised cable operators if we
    redesignate the 18.3-18.55 GHz band for primary use by GSO/FSS
    operations; (2) GSO/FSS will be unable to effectively blanket
    license ubiquitously deployed earth stations in the 18.3-18.55 GHz
    band due to the large numbers of CARS and PCO operations currently
    using this band, especially in metropolitan areas; (3) relocation of
    CARS and PCO operations from the 18.3-18.55 GHz band, pursuant to
    the relocation procedures adopted in this *Report and Order*, would
    prove costly to GSO/FSS operators entering the band due to the vast
    number of terrestrial operations in this band, possibly slowing
    deployment of satellite systems in the band; (4) GSO/FSS will be
    unable to use spectrum in the 18.6-18.8 GHz band for ubiquitously
    deployed satellite earth stations if the pfd limits that exist in
    this band are not relaxed. We note, in this regard, that the U.S.
    made a proposal to the WRC-2000 that would establish a world-wide
    primary allocation to the Earth Exploration-Satellite Service (EESS)
    service in the 18.6-18.8 GHz band, as well as a relaxed pfd limit in
    the 18.6-18.8 GHz band of -95 (dBW/m^2^) across the 18.6-18.8 GHz
    band for all angles of arrival. This proposal, which was adopted by
    WRC-2000, balances the need for a world-wide primary allocation for
    the EESS with the need for a more workable FSS pfd limit.
    Recognizing that the relaxed pfd limit would benefit FSS operators
    in the 18.6-18.8 GHz band, and after coordination with NTIA, we
    hereby adopt the WRC-2000 relaxed pfd limit within new section
    25.208 (e) and appropriately modify FN US 255 of Section 2.106 of
    the Commission's Rules. Future use of narrowband terrestrial fixed
    service operations in the 18.55-18.8 GHz band, specifically the
    18.58-18.82 GHz band, will be unavailable due to the inability to
    access its paired spectrum at 18.92-19.16 GHz.[^89] Finally, we
    conclude that the public interest is best served by designating the
    18.3-18.58 GHz band for co-primary use by the terrestrial fixed
    service operations and GSO/FSS, and the 18.58-18.8 GHz band to
    GSO/FSS on a primary basis.

42. Further, we note that there is evidence in the record that a Joint
    Working Group, consisting of members of the FSS and terrestrial
    fixed service industries, worked "to define allocations to produce
    an (FS-Free) 250 MHz band for GSO/FSS use by swapping the FS
    services out of the 18.55-18.8 GHz band and moving the GSO/FSS
    primary assignment from 18.3-18.55 GHz to the free band."[^90] This
    effort is consistent with our decision, but does not exactly mirror
    it. Therefore, we modify our *18 GHz NPRM* designation plan and
    designate 280 MHz of co-primary spectrum to terrestrial fixed
    service operations and GSO/FSS in the 18.3-18.58 GHz segment, and
    220 MHz of primary spectrum at 18.58-18.8 GHz to GSO/FSS.

43. Additionally, we note that co-frequency sharing requires two modes
    of sharing: FSS space station with terrestrial fixed service and
    terrestrial fixed service with FSS earth stations. Currently, FSS
    space stations do not coordinate with terrestrial fixed service
    stations. The space stations must operate below a specified pfd
    limit that was designed to protect the fixed service. Because the
    record of this proceeding has established that such interference is
    nevertheless possible in certain circumstances, we need to ensure
    that interference to existing terrestrial fixed station receivers
    will not occur if the FS receivers are pointed at the FSS
    satellite.[^91]

44. We recognize that there may be existing terrestrial fixed service
    links that have receiving antennas physically pointed toward the arc
    of the sky comprising the geostationary satellite[^92] orbit and
    therefore may be subject to interference from new GSO/FSS
    operations. These co-primary terrestrial links enjoy primary status
    in the frequency they occupy due to the "first-come, first-served"
    principle. Because terrestrial fixed services operating in the
    18.3-18.8 GHz band were first to occupy this co-primary spectrum and
    there are currently no antenna pointing restrictions, they are
    recognized to have a right to point at the geostationary satellite
    orbit.[^93] Maintaining such a right would result in the failure of
    sharing in the band, once the satellite systems actually begin
    operation. Therefore, another approach is needed. At the same time,
    we note that, subsequent to the adoption of this *Report and Order*,
    if future fixed station receivers in the band 18.3-18.58 GHz point
    at the geostationary-satellite orbit, they do so at their own risk,
    because this *Report and Order* clearly states that interference
    from space stations under such circumstances would be possible. We
    first address space-to-Earth sharing to establish the specific
    conditions for these relationships.

45. We conclude that the conditions for ensuring successful
    space-to-Earth sharing between the terrestrial fixed service and the
    GSO/FSS may not be present if any [new]{.underline} terrestrial
    fixed service link receivers are pointed within 2 degrees of the
    geostationary satellite orbit.[^94] If such receivers are pointed
    more than 2 degrees away from that Orbit, such pointing generally
    will provide approximately 18 dB of isolation, which should result
    in protection from space-borne interference. The potential for
    [existing]{.underline} fixed links to be interfered with will be
    determined according to the following standard: we will consider any
    receiving existing terrestrial fixed stations pointed within 2
    degrees of the orbit to be subject potentially to interference, and
    therefore establish this condition as a space station coordination
    trigger.[^95] We see this licensee-based process as taking place in
    two phases: first, an evaluation of the actual potential for
    interference would be performed and the results considered by both
    the fixed station and the FSS station licensees; second, a method of
    resolution would be agreed upon and implemented.

46. Thus, we establish a coordination process referenced to a "Legacy
    List" of such terrestrial fixed service stations.[^96] The
    appropriate GSO/FSS station licensee (the one towards which the FS
    station is pointed) would be responsible for paying any associated
    modification costs.[^97] We recognize that determining which
    terrestrial fixed service stations point at the orbit may be
    difficult, and that, because information may be unreliable, using
    the currently specified location and relative height of
    send-and-receive locations may not provide accurate results.[^98]

47. We recognize that the development of an accurate Legacy List will be
    critical to the success of FS/FSS coordination efforts, and that
    such a list can be developed with reference to a database containing
    the geographic location and relative height of the FS send and
    receive antennas. While we recognize that such information is
    currently available in the Commission's Database, this is the first
    time we expect the information to be used to establish FS receiver
    pointing for coordination purposes. Therefore, we provide in this
    *Report and* Order the opportunity for existing FS licensees in the
    18.3-18.8 GHz band to update their location and height parameters
    and to inform the Commission in such cases where their receive sites
    in this shared band point within two degrees of the GSO and at which
    position.[^99] This update will not be considered a modification of
    fixed service facilities, although the compatibility of the "new"
    location will need to be assessed by interested parties.

48. We are equally concerned about ensuring successful sharing between
    FSS receiving earth stations and transmitting FS stations. Noting
    that such earth stations would transmit in the 28/29 GHz band and
    would need to be coordinated in that band, a common location would,
    of course, also be used for the reception of GSO/FSS signals in this
    shared band. This means that the same site must also be available in
    the downlink band. Such downlink sharing would also have two
    aspects. In this co-primary band, future FSS receive earth stations
    would need to ensure that the coordinated location would also not
    receive interference from transmitting existing FS stations. We
    expect that the availability of an earth station site at the
    downlink frequency may place a greater constraint on earth station
    location than that of the uplink, due to the wide distribution of
    co-primary fixed links in this band, compared to that of the uplink
    bands. The chosen location should then be communicated to the
    Commission to ensure that future terrestrial stations will
    coordinate their transmitting FS operations. Clearly, the fewer
    earth stations required, the easier the FSS earth station site
    selection process will be and the more useable the 18.3-18.58 GHz
    band will be for the fixed service.[^100]

49. We believe these actions will provide an equitable approach to
    sharing because both the terrestrial fixed service and the FSS
    stations must assume burdens, based upon this *Report and Order,*
    not presently in the Commission's existing rules: the FSS space
    stations must coordinate their space stations with those FS stations
    pointed at their satellites and must accept limitations on the
    location of their receiving earth stations, a new process.
    Concomitantly, future terrestrial fixed service stations may point
    at the orbit only at their own risk, a condition not previously
    stated and must coordinate with any prior FSS earth stations. Both
    services collectively assume the responsibility for making this
    process work, subject to the continuing oversight of the Commission.

50. [18.8-19.3 GHz and 19.3-19.7 GHz Frequency Bands.]{.underline} In
    the *18 GHz NPRM*, we proposed to designate the 18.8-19.3 GHz band
    to NGSO/FSS on a primary basis. Teledesic urged us to adopt this
    proposal and, by doing so, protect the decisions made at WRC-95 and
    WRC-97 (World Radiocommunication Conferences) to allocate
    internationally the 18.8-19.3 GHz band to NGSO/FSS.[^101] TIA-Fixed
    Section, on the other hand, requests that we allocate the 19.26-19.3
    GHz for terrestrial fixed service use in order to maintain the
    existing paired channels at 17.7-17.74 GHz,[^102] a proposal that
    was also discussed in the Teledesic Reply.[^103] Lockheed contends
    that we should provide a primary designation of 500 MHz at 18.8-19.3
    GHz for NGSO/FSS "to allow for ubiquitous deployment of NGSO FSS
    user terminals."[^104] Teledesic recently entered into the record of
    this proceeding a detailed statement[^105] about the sensitivity of
    its system to interference from fixed stations operating within the
    18.8-19.3 GHz band. Teledesic's statement has implications for both
    the primary and secondary designation of this band. We discuss
    secondary designations in the next section of this *Report and
    Order*.

51. We have fashioned a primary designation solution that resolves the
    concerns of both the fixed and NGSO/FSS licensees in a balanced
    fashion, while providing the full requested service designation to
    the NGSO/FSS. The terrestrial fixed commenters are concerned that
    they will lose channels at 19.26-19.3 GHz that are paired with
    17.7-17.74 GHz. While those channel pairs will be lost in the
    adopted redesignation plan, it will happen in a way that should not
    cause difficulty to the fixed service. We have decided to permit
    existing fixed stations to continue using those channel pairs
    subject only to the overriding right of satellite providers to
    require them to be relocated. In practice, this means that stations
    in the NGSO/FSS service must accept the interference these stations
    would present or must pay to relocate the fixed stations to another
    band. While fixed service licensees are concerned that this may
    prove difficult, they will not be required to shut down until, under
    the relocation rules we adopt in this *Report and Order,*[^106] a
    facility providing comparable performance has been coordinated,
    built and proven to be of equivalent performance.. NGSO/FSS
    licensees wishing to eliminate FS interference to their earth
    stations will be fully responsible for relocating the fixed
    stations. This ensures both that the interference to the NGSO/FSS
    will not occur and gives the satellite licensees some control over
    relocation cost.[^107] While we note that Teledesic has stated in
    both their comments and their *ex parte* statement of November 30,
    1999 that they are willing to pay to relocate the fixed stations
    that will cause interference to their earth stations in the
    19.26-19.3 GHz band, they have proposed a different compensation
    method than the one adopted in this *Report and* Order.[^108] As
    both Teledesic and Lockheed point out, the 500 MHz of spectrum at
    18.8-19.3 is the only downlink spectrum available for Ka-band
    NGSO/FSS systems.[^109] We take this action because of the unique
    international status of the 18.8-19.3 GHz band, and because it is
    fashioned in such a manner to avoid any adverse impact on existing
    fixed service licensees. We also recognize that NGSO/FSS systems are
    likely to use the entire 500 MHz of spectrum, as pointed out by
    Teledesic, currently the only Commission NGSO FSS licensee in this
    band.[^110] Designing equipment to make locally varying adjustments
    to earth station receiving equipment would be extremely difficult
    and a costly project, possibly delaying the deployment of NGSO/FSS
    service in the band and certainly reducing the available service
    capacity. We conclude that designating the 18.8-19.3 GHz band to
    NGSO/FSS for primary use best serves the public interest.

52. Therefore, we concur with Teledesic and Lockheed that they will need
    a full 500 MHz primary designation, and thus, designate the
    18.8-19.3 GHz band on a primary basis to NGSO/FSS. We reject the
    request to maintain a primary allocation to terrestrial fixed
    service operations in the 19.26-19.3 GHz segment, recognizing that
    future fixed stations wishing to use these channel pairs must find
    alternative spectrum. We recognize that this solution does not
    directly address the provision of new fixed links that would have
    used spectrum in the 17.7-17.74 GHz and 19.26-19.3 GHz bands. While
    not prejudging future Commission action, we note that the
    development of new channelizations could significantly improve this
    situation.

53. In the *18 GHz NPRM*, we proposed to retain the designation of a
    co-primary allocation for terrestrial fixed service and MSS/FL in
    the 19.3-19.7 GHz band. We tentatively concluded that sharing in
    this band was feasible due to the limited number of MSS/FL expected
    to be deployed. Most commenters agreed with our proposal. Pegasus
    proposed a segmentation of the 19.3-19.7 band that would allocate
    the 19.3-19.45 GHz segment to MSS/FL and terrestrial fixed service
    on a co-primary basis, and the 19.45-19.7 GHz band to MSS/FL and
    GSO/FSS on a co-primary basis.[^111] We reject Pegasus' plan to
    segment the 19.3-19.7 GHz band as an effort to get more spectrum for
    GSO/FSS users in the 18 GHz band, at the expense of upsetting the
    overall equity and balance achieved in this *Report and Order*.
    Motorola argues that this proposal "would create a mixture of
    GSO/FSS-MSS/FL earth stations in a narrow band segment adjacent to
    an even narrower segment dedicated to MSS/FL-FS operations." [^112]

54. SBC argues that we should not place MSS/FL as a co-primary licensee
    in the 19.3-19.7 GHz segment[^113] because there are serious sharing
    concerns with such a designation, and proposes that we give
    terrestrial fixed services primary status in the 19.3-19.7 GHz
    segment. We reject SBC's request. Instead, we are retaining the
    designation which was adopted in the *28 GHz Report and Order* and
    under which, as Motorola points out, the Iridium System was
    successfully coordinated under Part 25 of the Commission's Rules and
    operated gateway earth stations in this band in the U.S.[^114] We
    note that given the number of MSS feeder links anticipated in this
    band, there is little material difference between this shared
    designation and a primary FS designation. We find no valid support
    in the record to dismiss our previous tentative conclusion that
    terrestrial fixed service and MSS/FL should retain their
    designations in the 19.3-19.7 GHz band. Thus, we conclude the public
    interest is served by maintaining this designation.

### Secondary Use

55. In the *18 GHz NPRM*, we proposed to allow secondary use of the
    entire\
    18 GHz band by terrestrial fixed services, GSO/FSS, and NGSO/FSS (in
    bands where the particular service did not enjoy either a primary or
    co-primary allocation) to provide flexibility throughout the
    band.[^115] We conclude that secondary use of the\
    18 GHz band is not viable because it would unreasonably inhibit
    ubiquitous deployment of these services and limit the use of
    spectrum by primary users of the bands. However, the continued
    operation of existing fixed stations in primary satellite bands on a
    non-interference basis would not limit the use of the bands by
    satellite earth stations; rather it would provide for the
    continuation of existing services to the public until new satellite
    earth stations are built. We discuss two different aspects of this
    issue below: Should we adopt secondary fixed designations and permit
    continued licensing of stations in bands designated on a primary
    basis to satellite services? Should we adopt secondary satellite
    designations in bands designated on a primary basis to the fixed
    service? We reject a third possibility, proposed by
    VisionStar.[^116] VisionStar proposed the adoption of a temporary
    secondary allocation for the terrestrial fixed service in bands that
    are assigned to GSO/FSS systems. They propose that this temporary
    secondary allocation would be limited to small businesses that would
    use the spectrum to provide GSO/FSS-like services to consumers
    through a terrestrial fixed network before 18 GHz GSO/FSS systems
    are launched and operating. We reject their proposal because we
    expect it would interfere with the intended application of the fixed
    service relocation procedure adopted in this *Report and Order.*

56. Regarding secondary fixed operations in primary satellite
    designations, we conclude that terrestrial fixed services generally
    should not be designated for secondary use in either primary GSO/FSS
    or primary NGSO/FSS bands subject to blanket licensing. We find that
    the continued licensing of these fixed stations, with the exception
    of indoor low power operations, is incompatible with the ubiquitous
    placement of earth stations in the primary satellite service,
    because they may interfere with FSS reception if located close
    enough to such stations. We would, literally, be encouraging the
    extension of a condition that we have determined to be incompatible
    with the ubiquitous distribution of primary satellite services.
    Regarding the low power fixed systems mentioned in the *NPRM,* in
    the 18.82-18.87 and 19.16-19.21 GHz bands, such stations have been
    licensed on a primary basis and will continue to be so licensed,
    given the proposal in the *NPRM* and the lack of significant
    comments.[^117] They will not be subject to the same transition
    rules as the full power stations in their band. In addition, they
    will not be subject to the same relocation requirement, since they
    will be co-primary with the FSS. They will be permitted to continue
    to operate, and new stations will be licensed subject only to the
    limitation that they operate indoors.[^118] The restriction to
    indoor use will, of necessity, place some signal attenuating barrier
    between low power fixed stations and FSS earth stations, which are
    always located outdoors. While interference could still be possible,
    the probability of interference is significantly, and acceptably,
    reduced as the interfering signal is so diminished. Several
    commenters urged us to eliminate secondary terrestrial fixed service
    designations in primary FSS bands.[^119] TIA-SOUS argued that the
    "proposal to license FS stations on a secondary basis in satellite
    spectrum would undercut the Commission's segmentation proposal by
    reintroducing the cost and delay associated with frequency
    coordination."[^120] TIA-SOUS reasons that a new coordination regime
    would have to be set up to determine whether new terrestrial fixed
    service stations could operate under secondary conditions. Lockheed
    asserts that we should not allow secondary terrestrial operations in
    the primary FSS band because of interference concerns.[^121] We
    agree with the assessment of TIA-SOUS and Lockheed. With the
    anticipated deployment of millions of satellite earth stations, we
    believe that it would be virtually impossible to implement an
    effective dispute-solving regime to discover terrestrial causes of
    interference to primary FSS earth stations. The difficulty in
    identifying the source of interference could have a substantial
    practical impact on FSS licensees, an impact that they are only
    responsible to evaluate when they are sharing the band with a
    primary designated fixed service. For example, attempting to
    identify the cause of interference and then fixing that problem may
    take time, causing a significant interruption in service. Such
    delays would raise operating costs for FSS users and would degrade
    the reliability of the company's service.[^122] We believe such
    circumstances are avoidable by rejecting our proposal to allow
    terrestrial fixed service operations to use primary FSS spectrum for
    secondary use services. The statement of Teledesic referenced
    above[^123] underscores this decision with respect to primary
    NGSO/FSS service allocations that are blanket licensed, by
    describing the severe impact that a fixed station of at least 39 dB
    e.i.r.p. would have on an earth station in this band.

57. We now consider whether the GSO/FSS service can be secondary in
    primary NGSO/FSS bands. In principle, such designations would only
    be feasible if the stations of the secondary service could be
    designed to operate without impact on the primary service. This
    result could be achieved if the NGSO receiver avoided pointing at
    the Geostationary Orbit. However, because the 18.8-19.3 and
    28.6-29.1 GHz primary NGSO designations are the only bands that do
    not restrict NGSO systems from pointing at the orbit, this fact
    greatly increases the capacity of satellites in this band, since
    fewer satellites will be required if a larger part of the sky is
    available for service. To avoid pointing at the orbit would require
    more satellites to achieve the same system capacity, increasing the
    cost of providing NGSO/FSS services at the same level. It would be a
    great constraint on the NGSO service to require such orbit
    avoidance, and would appear to be unwarranted to avoid interference
    from a secondary service. We, therefore, do not designate a
    secondary GSO/FSS service in the downlink NGSO band.

58. Finally, we consider whether the FSS service can be permitted to
    operate on a secondary basis in terrestrial fixed service primary
    bands, as we proposed in our *NPRM*. Under such primary/secondary
    sharing scenarios, primary operations must be able to determine
    which station is causing harmful interference, should such
    interference result from any secondary operation. Secondary FSS
    operations would have to protect new primary terrestrial fixed
    satellite users. As a result, terrestrial fixed users face raised
    costs through either coordination with secondary users before
    beginning service or delays in service while trying to find causes
    of interference. Furthermore, under such a scenario, the FSS user
    would be at the mercy of new terrestrial links that may cause
    significant interference, which they must accept, and disruption of
    service. Based on these considerations, we reject the proposal to
    allow secondary FSS service in bands designated for primary use by
    terrestrial fixed service.

### Conclusions Regarding the Band Plan

59. We believe the band plan adopted herein generally meets the spectrum
    needs of the respective services designated to operate in the 18 GHz
    band. We note that, like our *NPRM* proposal, the band plan we adopt
    herein provides GSO/FSS with 1000 MHz of spectrum, 720 MHz of which
    is primary and 280 MHz of which is co-primary. Several satellite
    commenters desire to obtain a minimum of 1000 MHz of unshared
    downlink spectrum in the Ka-band. These commenters seem to base
    their arguments, in part, on the fact that we designated 1000 MHz of
    uplink spectrum to GSO/FSS in the *28 GHz* *First Report and Order.*
    The *28 GHz First* *Report and Order,* however, designated 750 MHz
    of primary uplink spectrum for GSO/FSS systems, and 250 MHz of
    co-primary uplink spectrum shared with NGSO/FSS systems. We are
    adopting a similar approach in the downlink band. We generally
    designate equal amounts of spectrum to GSO/FSS, taking into account
    systems for uplink and downlink use, and this *Report and Order*
    provides just that, when considering both primary and co-primary
    spectrum.

60. We adopt this Band Plan acknowledging that many existing terrestrial
    fixed services operating in parts of the 18 GHz band that currently
    serve the public will be forced to relocate their facilities to
    serve these customers. As previously discussed, terrestrial fixed
    operators are losing use of 720 MHz of previously usable spectrum
    due to this designation. Furthermore, the 500 MHz we designate for
    NGSO/FSS services represents the only block of downlink spectrum in
    which these services can currently operate. Moreover, satellite
    commenters failed to demonstrate how existing consumer demand would
    justify the designation of 1000 MHz of spectrum for exclusive
    primary use by them. We conclude that the 500 MHz of downlink
    spectrum (280 MHz co-primary at 18.3-18.58 and 220 MHz primary at
    18.58-18.8) in conjunction with the 500 MHz of downlink spectrum at
    19.7-20.2 GHz designated to GSO/FSS satisfies the near-term spectrum
    requirements of GSO/FSS. We also conclude that the 500 MHz primary
    spectrum designated to NGSO/FSS at 18.8-19.3 GHz and the 400 MHz of
    co-primary spectrum at 19.3-19.7 GHz to MSS/FL meets the spectrum
    requirements of the respective services.

## Continued Rights of Existing Stations to Operate

61. In the *NPRM* we proposed to grandfather terrestrial fixed service
    operations that have been either licensed or for which applications
    are pending, as of the release date of th\[e\] *NPRM*, for any band
    that is proposed to be designated for fixed satellite service use on
    a primary basis.[^124] Based on the tentative conclusion that
    satellite operators will be able to design systems and locate
    facilities to avoid unwanted interference from terrestrial fixed
    operations, we proposed in the *NPRM* to grant indefinite
    grandfathered status to existing terrestrial fixed operators. Under
    the *NPRM* proposal, these grandfathered systems, however, "would
    not be allowed to expand or change their current operations in any
    of the bands in which grandfathering applies in any manner that
    might increase interference to satellite earth stations."[^125] We
    requested comment on this grandfathering proposal.

62. We also requested comment on the relocation of some or all of the
    grandfathered terrestrial facilities if, in fact, satellite
    operators are unable to design their systems to avoid harmful
    interference from grandfathered systems.[^126] We requested comment
    on whether the terrestrial relocation principles discussed in the
    *Emerging Technologies* proceeding (ET Doc. No. 92-9),[^127] and
    other proceedings implementing similar concepts, such as the
    Mobile-Satellite Service at 2 GHz allocation proceeding (ET Doc. No.
    95-18)[^128] should be applied to the 18 GHz band.

63. Recognizing the importance of providing continuity of service to the
    public, as well as the need to reasonably protect investments in
    existing terrestrial fixed service operations and fixed service
    operations at an advanced stage of planning, we will permit
    terrestrial fixed stations currently operating in spectrum being
    designated in this *Report and Order* for exclusive satellite use
    (18.58-19.3 GHz) to continue to operate on a co-primary basis, but
    subject to the overriding right of satellite providers to require
    them to relocate. In consideration of the record, we adopt the
    following:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
(a) those terrestrial fixed services in the 18.58-19.3 GHz band that
    have been either licensed or for which applications are pending as
    of the adoption date of this *Report and Order* are granted
    permission to continue to operate on a co-primary basis, subject to
    the overriding right of satellite providers to require them to
    relocate. As of the effective date of this *Report and Order*, such
    terrestrial fixed stations in this portion of the 18 GHz band can be
    compelled to relocate in accordance with the relocation rules we
    adopt herein. However, during the applicable period of continued
    co-primary status, the satellite providers requiring relocation must
    pay for all relocation costs, as described below:

\(1\) the co-primary status of terrestrial fixed service operations in
the 18.58-19.26 GHz band will terminate ten (10) years from the date of
the adoption of this *Report and Order*. Upon the conclusion of this
ten-year period, existing terrestrial fixed stations in the 18.58-19.26
GHz band may continue to operate on a non-interference basis vis-a-vis
the primary service in the band. If these operations are required to
relocate after that date, they must bear all costs of relocation
themselves.

\(2\) the co-primary status for stations in the 19.26-19.30 GHz band
will be permanent; if certain links in the 19.26-19.3 GHz can not
operate without interference to NGSO FSS, then those links will be
relocated at the expense of the NGSO/FSS licensee;

(b) co-primary fixed service operations in the 18.58-19.3 GHz band may
    make limited modifications[^129] to their systems, as long as those
    modifications do not increase the amount of spectrum used in this
    portion of the 18 GHz band by that system or do not increase
    interference to satellite earth stations;

(c) Co-primary terrestrial fixed service operations in the 18.58-19.3
    GHz band will be subject to new Rules Sections in Parts 74, 78 and
    101, all containing the text of new Section 101.85, which will
    govern transition of the 18.58-19.3 GHz band from the terrestrial
    fixed services to the fixed-satellite service (FSS). These new rules
    are based upon the concepts used in the existing Section 101.75 for
    the PCS service transition. The relocation rules we adopt in this
    *Report and Order* define when the relocation is considered
    completed, depending, in part, on the confirmation by the fixed
    station, after a 12-month trial period, that the new facilities are
    comparable.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
64. Generally, commenters focused their remarks on three aspects of our
    grandfathering proposal: which stations should be grandfathered (the
    "cut-off" date); the length of time grandfathered systems should
    enjoy this status; and, whether grandfathered systems should be
    allowed to modify their systems. We address the "cut-off" date, the
    sunset provision, and modifications to these systems below.

### Cut-off Date

65. Lockheed took exception to our proposal to grandfather pending
    applications. According to Lockheed, "operators who merely have
    filed an application or who have not yet expended any significant
    sums of money on constructing their systems" do not deserve
    grandfathered status.[^130] We disagree. We consider the filing of
    an application before the cut-off date to be an expression of
    immediate need, and thus worthy of being able to continue to operate
    subject to the relocation rights established herein. Accordingly, we
    will provide continued co-primary status for terrestrial fixed
    service operations that have been either licensed, or for which
    applications are pending, in the 18.8-19.3 GHz frequency band, as of
    September 18, 1998, as proposed in our *18 GHz NPRM*, which proposed
    that terrestrial fixed services operating and pending in the
    18.8-19.3 GHz band be subject to the September 18, 1998 cut-off
    date. Furthermore, we provide continued co-primary status for
    terrestrial fixed service operations that have either been licensed,
    or for which applications are pending, in the 18.58-18.8 GHz
    frequency band, as of the adoption date of this *Report and Order*.

66. We are extending the "cut-off" date for the 18.58-18.8 GHz band
    because the *18 GHz NPRM* stated that the cut-off date would apply
    in "any *band that is proposed to be designated* for fixed satellite
    use on a primary basis."[^131] We note that none of the proposed
    band plans put forth in the *18 GHz* *NPRM* discussed redesignating
    the 18.58-18.8 GHz band for primary use by GSO/FSS. Therefore, we
    believe it is appropriate to move the "cut-off" date forward to
    coincide with the adoption of the *Report and Order*, recognizing
    that applications for terrestrial fixed stations in the 18.58-18.8
    GHz band may have been filed since the adoption of the *NPRM*
    without specific indication that this band would no longer be
    available for such use. We note that pursuant to the band plan
    adopted today, any extension of the "cut-off" date in the 18.3-18.58
    GHz band is moot, because the 18.3-18.58 GHz band is designated to
    terrestrial fixed service and GSO/FSS on a co-primary basis.

### Sunset Provision\`

67. In the *18 GHz NPRM*, we proposed that existing terrestrial fixed
    services operating in bands redesignated to reflect primary status
    for FSS operations would be grandfathered on a permanent basis.
    Several commenters oppose permanent grandfathering and urge that
    there be a sunset date.[^132] In making a decision to sunset the
    co-primary status of stations, except in 19.26-19.30 GHz, we are
    deciding that at some point the financial burden of our
    redesignation decision should be shifted from satellite to
    terrestrial licensees. Initially, we believe those costs should be
    shouldered by the satellite licensees if they choose to require
    existing terrestrial fixed licensees to move to new frequencies in
    order to accommodate new satellite operations. As discussed in
    adopting the Emerging Technologies decision, our policy of
    permitting reimbursement to incumbent licensees for relocation costs
    is based on the premise that such reimbursement might help new
    services to be deployed more quickly than if reimbursement was not
    otherwise provided.[^133] However, we also believe that this
    reimbursement obligation generally should be limited to a reasonable
    transition period. Such an approach is consistent with our
    assessment that the public interest would be better served in the
    long run by these new uses.

68. Commenters favoring a sunset date for grandfathered terrestrial
    licensees argue that permanent grandfathering "appears inconsistent
    with the premise of the *NPRM*,"[^134] where we tentatively
    concluded that the public interest is best served by separating
    terrestrial from ubiquitous FSS earth stations. TIA-SOUS argues that
    permanent grandfathering will "preclud\[e\] a significant portion of
    the public from receiving innovative FSS services---even though the
    Commission finds it in the public interest for the incumbent to
    relocate to another band so that the public can have both."[^135]

69. Commenters also differ on the appropriate sunset period, with
    suggestions ranging from three [^136] to fifteen years.[^137] GE
    Americom argues that setting a three year sunset for grandfathered
    status "allows terrestrial services time to move, but creates
    certainty as to the time satellites will be able to use their entire
    range of dedicated spectrum."[^138] Teledesic proposes that we set
    January 1, 2004 as an appropriate sunset.[^139] The Teledesic plan
    would make grandfathered terrestrial users secondary on this sunset
    date, meaning that after January 1, 2004, formerly grandfathered
    terrestrial fixed service operations would be responsible for any
    relocation costs. Pegasus contends that a sunset of ten (10) years
    following the release of this *Report and Order* "represents an
    appropriate compromise between GSO FSS and FS interests, and is
    necessary for consistently high quality reception of Ka-band FSS
    signals in urban areas and the achievement of a truly national
    ubiquitous satellite service."[^140] We agree with Pegasus and adopt
    a ten year sunset, noting that a balance must be struck between
    burdens on satellite licensees and terrestrial licensees that
    provides an adequate transition period while giving effect to our
    redesignation decision. As discussed previously, this *Report and*
    *Order* grants co-primary status to existing terrestrial fixed
    stations in the 18.58-19.3 GHz band.[^141] As a general rule, we
    agree that the co-primary status should be limited by a sunset
    period. However, we have found it necessary to permanently grant
    co-primary status to existing terrestrial fixed stations in the
    19.26-19.3 GHz band because the channels in this band are paired
    with channels that are being retained for primary terrestrial fixed
    use at 17.7-17.74 GHz, thus magnifying the impact of this
    redesignation on the fixed service. If we were to impose a ten year
    sunset period, users of these pairings would likely be required
    because of equipment availability to relocate not only their
    transmissions in the 19.26-19.30 GHz band but also their paired
    transmissions in the 17.7-17.74 GHz even though the 17.7-17.74 GHz
    transmissions are not in a band that would be shared with FSS
    operations. Because of the significant impact on terrestrial fixed
    licensees, and since there are few existing fixed stations in this
    band, we do not believe it is appropriate to sunset the co-primary
    status, and associated relocation reimbursement rights, of existing
    terrestrial stations in this band.

70. In all other bands we conclude that sunsetting after ten years would
    best serve the public interest. Allowing terrestrial fixed services
    to operate in the 18.58-18.8 GHz and 18.8-19.3 GHz bands on a
    permanent basis is inconsistent with the basic premise of this
    *Report and Order*, which has been accepted by a majority of the
    commenters to this proceeding: that the public interest is best
    served by separating terrestrial fixed service operations from
    ubiquitously deployed FSS earth stations.[^142] The sunset date will
    allow existing terrestrial systems to continue to operate on an
    interim basis and to plan for transition to an alternative
    frequency.

71. We believe that a sunset period of ten (10) years for continued
    co-primary status of existing terrestrial fixed stations in the
    18.58-18.8 GHz and 18.8-19.26 GHz frequency band is an appropriate
    compromise that will allow these systems to continue to operate in
    these bands, while giving FSS interests the option to pay the cost
    of relocating such systems if FSS interests want to deploy
    operations in those areas. We stress that the significance of the
    ten-year period is limited to who will pay for the relocation of
    existing terrestrial fixed stations when it is found that they
    would, due to the interference they would present, preclude the
    establishment of FSS stations. In the absence of an FSS earth
    station in their vicinity, they may continue to operate beyond the
    ten-year period. Recognizing this, the fundamental issue here is how
    long constitutes an adequate period during which the FSS station
    should pay. Some FSS commenters urged us to adopt a relatively short
    sunset period. As mentioned above, GE Americom requested that we set
    December 31, 2002 as a sunset date,[^143] while Teledesic, Hughes,
    KaStar, and PanAmSat ask that we adopt a five (5) year sunset date
    for grandfathering terrestrial fixed service operations.[^144]
    Although these commenters are correct in arguing that permanent
    grandfathering would frustrate the basic premise of this *Report and
    Order*, we believe that either a three or five-year sunset would be
    insufficient because, as FWCC correctly notes, a relatively short
    sunset period could be viewed as an attempt to avoid relocation
    costs, even though there might be significant impacts from
    relocating fixed services after such a proposed sunset. We believe
    that it is contrary to the public interest and not conducive to a
    stable investment environment to make terrestrial fixed operators,
    who currently serve the public, pay for relocation costs after such
    a short period of time.[^145] Thus, we reject the proposal of
    Teledesic and other satellite operators urging a five-year or less
    sunset period for grandfathered terrestrial fixed services.

72. API urges that we adopt a sunset of fifteen years, arguing that this
    period is appropriate "given the normal depreciation of microwave
    equipment, the long period of time before satellite systems will be
    fully deployed, and the uncertainty that market demand for 18 GHz
    satellite services will ever develop."[^146] Although it may be true
    that the market for satellite systems in the 18 GHz band is in its
    nascency, a fifteen year sunset may frustrate our desire to segment
    the band in an efficient manner in order to bring exciting new
    services to the American people. Furthermore, because our relocation
    policies are not premised on depreciation scheduled equipment, we
    decline to consider this further. We believe that ten years is an
    appropriate compromise that will protect investment in existing
    terrestrial fixed service operations in the 18 GHz band, and allow
    for an orderly transition. Furthermore, nothing in this *Report and
    Order* precludes a satellite operator from reaching a voluntary
    agreement with a fixed service licensee prior to the sunset date, in
    order to speed the transition to operating in the segmented bands.
    Therefore, we adopt a ten-year sunset on co-primary status for
    terrestrial fixed service operations in the 18.58-18.8 GHz and
    18.8-19.26 GHz bands.

### Modifications

73. In the *18 GHz NPRM*, we proposed to give grandfathered terrestrial
    fixed service interference protection from satellite operations, and
    proposed that satellite earth stations must accept interference
    received from grandfathered terrestrial systems.[^147] However,
    "grandfathered terrestrial fixed service licensees would not be
    allowed to expand or change their current operations in any of the
    bands in which grandfathering applies in any manner that might
    increase interference to satellite earth stations."[^148]

74. Terrestrial fixed service operators disagreed with our system
    modification proposal.[^149] These commenters present two arguments
    to support allowing more modifications. First, commenters claim that
    modifications are necessary to maintain the viability of
    grandfathered terrestrial fixed service operations;[^150] and
    second, they point to past Commission actions providing different
    treatment of this issue.[^151]

75. In response to these comments, we clarify our *18 GHz NPRM*
    proposal. We adopt rules in this *Report and Order* that specify
    that terrestrial fixed services may perform the modifications
    approved in past Commission actions (acceptable modifications
    include: minor modifications, changes in antenna azimuth, antenna
    beamwidth, antenna height, authorized power, channel loading,
    emission, station location, and ownership or control; reduction in
    authorized frequencies; or addition of frequencies not in the 18 GHz
    band[^152]); however, such modifications may not increase
    interference to satellite earth stations, or result in a facility
    that would be more costly to relocate. We fear that allowing for
    continuous upgrades would continue to cause interference to
    ubiquitously deployed satellite earth stations and would frustrate
    our desired band plan and the related public interest
    benefits.[^153] Allowing for modifications that would increase
    interference to satellite operators that designed their systems to
    avoid a certain level of interference from existing terrestrial
    fixed service operations would be unfair and costly to satellite
    operators operating on a primary designation.[^154] Furthermore, we
    believe that by prohibiting modifications that increase interference
    to deployed satellite systems we will promote full consideration of
    relocation to a different frequency band, in the event a
    modification should become necessary.

## Relocation

76. In the *18 GHz NPRM*, we acknowledged that satellite operators may
    be unable to design their systems to avoid interference from
    grandfathered terrestrial fixed service operations, and that
    relocation of some terrestrial fixed stations may be
    desirable.[^155] It is a central aspect of our decisions in this
    proceeding that stations of the new primary service must be able to
    establish their operations without significant interference from
    existing stations of any other service. At the same time, such a
    right must be accompanied by the obligation on the part of the new
    satellite entrant to provide for the relocation of any existing
    fixed stations operating in spectrum being designated for exclusive
    satellite use (18.58-19.3 GHz) which they determine is necessary.
    The prompt commencement of satellite services may depend upon the
    speedy relocation of existing fixed stations in some areas. We
    recognize that the successful completion of the relocation process
    will take significant effort and commitment on the part of both the
    space and terrestrial communities. To facilitate this effort and
    commitment, the relocation process adopted herein affords reasonable
    flexibility to FSS licensees to roll out their operations in a
    timely and economic manner. We asked for comments on relocation
    rules and procedures. Many of the commenters urged us to base
    relocation rules on the rules adopted in ET Docket 92-9 (Emerging
    Technologies proceeding)[^156] for the 2 GHz band.[^157] In general,
    we have adopted that approach.

77. Teledesic argues that we "should require relocation payments to
    incumbents based on the un-amortized cost of the replaced equipment,
    plus 2% of these 'hard costs' to help cover engineering expenses and
    installation costs."[^158] Teledesic also asserts that basing
    relocation cost payments on anything other than the un-amortized
    cost of the replaced equipment would be inefficient.[^159] Teledesic
    reasons that basing relocation on un-amortized costs prevents
    incumbent terrestrial services from receiving a windfall for new
    equipment. Teledesic correctly points out that "\[e\]very FS
    operator carries the cost of equipment on tax deductions over time
    to recover for the depreciation of the equipment."[^160] Teledesic
    argues that if new equipment is needed to relocate terrestrial fixed
    services to new bands, this will result in satellite operators
    paying for the cost that has already been deducted, and thus
    recovered.

78. We reject Teledesic's proposal. The Commission's policy has been to
    place the cost of an involuntary relocation to comparable facilities
    on the shoulders of the new entrant.[^161] We reaffirm this as our
    policy. As we have stated, "\[B\]ecause replacement equipment must
    be provided at no cost to existing licensees, concerns for
    amortizing or recouping investment in existing equipment are
    misplaced. Such replacement equipment will operate during the
    original amortization periods that would have applied to the old
    equipment."[^162] In fact, we have recently reaffirmed the
    application of the Emerging Technologies proceeding relocation
    policies to Mobile-Satellite Services.[^163]

79. While the new rules we are adopting are based upon the concepts
    adopted in the Emerging Technologies proceeding and contained in
    Section 101.75 for the PCS service transition, there are some
    differences between the situations at 2 GHz and 18 GHz that warrant
    some changes in the relocation rules for 18 GHz. We note that the
    rules adopted in Emerging Technologies proceeding were developed at
    the time solely based on the specifics of the sharing issues at 2
    GHz. While we strive for consistency in our rules whenever
    appropriate, we need not adhere to the specifics of the existing 2
    GHz relocation policy at 18 GHz if it is inappropriate.

80. In developing the Part 101 relocation rules for the PCS service at 2
    GHz, we were displacing incumbent licensees through the introduction
    of an entirely new terrestrial service that would be gradually
    rolled out in various locations over time. In the case of the
    instant proceeding, we are modifying the way in which two existing
    services are to share spectrum in which both services are currently
    licensed on a co-primary basis. Additionally, in the spectrum that
    we are designating as exclusively for use by the Fixed-Satellite
    Service, FSS licensees are expected to roll out their service
    rapidly on a nation-wide basis, often to ubiquitously deployed
    end-user terminals. Such service will require expedited access to
    the spectrum. The current Part 101 relocation rules that provide for
    a lengthy voluntary negotiating period, followed by another
    mandatory negotiating period, are not well-suited to this required
    expedited access. We believe the relocation rules for the 18 GHz
    services should rather focus on ensuring that the relocated
    terrestrial fixed stations are guaranteed comparable replacement
    facilities in a reasonably expedited fashion. In addition, we note
    that many of the existing 18 GHz terrestrial fixed stations are
    likely to be able to be relocated elsewhere in the 18 GHz band, and
    that such relocation is likely to be accomplished quickly and
    relatively inexpensively through the re-tuning of existing
    equipment.

81. Accordingly, we are not requiring a voluntary negotiating period as
    we previously established for the PCS transition in Section
    101.69(c). Under our 18 GHz transition rules, FSS licensees may
    enter into negotiations with co-primary terrestrial fixed services
    in the 18.58-19.3 GHz band for the purpose of agreeing to terms
    under which the terrestrial licensees would either relocate or
    accept a sharing arrangement.[^164] If no agreement is reached
    within two years for non-public safety incumbents and three years
    for public safety incumbents, an FSS licensee may initiate
    involuntary relocation pursuant to Section 101.91 of the rules we
    are adopting today. We believe these time periods provide a
    reasonable balance between the needs of new FSS operators to gain
    access to spectrum and the needs of existing FS operators to ensure
    that relocated facilities are provided that meet their needs. We are
    providing additional mandatory negotiations time for public safety
    operations, noting comments by the Association of Public-Safety
    Officials-International, Inc. about the special need of public
    safety systems to be able to continue to operate reliably during any
    transition period.

82. In the event that agreement is not reached in any negotiation
    period, the FSS licensee will have the option of invoking
    involuntary relocation. In such a case, FSS licensees would be
    obligated to relocate only the specific links that cause the
    interference problem. Under involuntary relocation, a terrestrial
    fixed station must relocate provided that the FSS licensee
    guarantees payment of relocation costs,[^165] completes all
    activities necessary for implementing the replacement
    facilities,[^166] and builds and tests the replacement system for
    comparability.[^167] Terrestrial fixed service operators are not
    required to relocate until the alternative facilities are available
    for a reasonable time to make adjustments, determine comparability,
    and ensure a seamless handoff. It would not be in the public
    interest to allow a right of return to relocated incumbents, as was
    provided in the Emerging Technologies proceeding. The disruption to
    national, or potentially region-wide or world-wide, satellite
    systems for the benefit of relatively few terrestrial fixed
    incumbents is infeasible. We will therefore allow involuntarily
    relocated terrestrial fixed incumbents to petition the Commission
    for additional modification to or replacement of their equipment in
    any case where the incumbent believes it has not received comparable
    performance from its retuned or replaced equipment. Upon proof
    shown, we will order the FSS licensee in question to further modify
    or replace the incumbent terrestrial fixed licensee's equipment. We
    believe that these safeguards to ensuring comparable terrestrial
    facilities obviate the need for more lengthy negotiating periods. We
    note that pursuant to the sunset provisions adopted above, FSS
    operators will generally no longer be responsible for relocation
    costs incurred by terrestrial incumbents after ten (10) years from
    the adoption date of this *Report and Order*.[^168] By adopting
    these relocation rules, we put into place a proven system that
    should lead to efficient relocation and ultimately to the band
    segmentation that we conclude serves the public interest. We also
    believe that the relocation rules provide reasonable flexibility to
    FSS licensees to establish their operations in a timely and economic
    manner.

83. We are also adopting, within our negotiation rules, criteria for
    comparable facilities. Both the existing 2 GHz rules and the rules
    we proposed in this proceeding include general criteria that must be
    met for facilities that are provided under involuntary relocation
    procedures to be considered comparable.[^169] In a separate
    proceeding on the allocation of spectrum at 2 GHz for use by the
    Mobile-Satellite Service, ET Docket No. 95-18, ICO Services Limited
    (ICO) suggested that these criteria be included in the section of
    the rules that governs mandatory negotiations. We believe that this
    change is appropriate for the negotiation rules we are adopting at
    18 GHz, as it would be useful to define the target of negotiations.
    For this reason, we are including these criteria in Section 101.89
    of the rules we are adopting.

84. As a final note on relocation, we recognize that this *Report and
    Order* puts into place a process that will affect a significant
    number of fixed microwave links. We urge the affected parties to
    find ways to minimize the cost and facilitate the introduction of
    new satellite services. We believe it should be possible to realize
    very significant economies of scale if many of the necessary
    relocations of fixed microwave services could be contracted and the
    necessary equipment purchased in blocks larger than single
    facilities. While the Commission should play no direct role in such
    an effort, we stand ready to offer whatever guidance or
    encouragement is sought by the central parties involved.

## Blanket Licensing

85. In the *18 GHz NPRM*, we tentatively concluded that blanket
    licensing of satellite earth stations in bands designated for
    primary use by either GSO/FSS or NGSO/FSS operations in the Ka-band
    is in the public interest.[^170] We declined, however, to propose to
    implement blanket licensing in shared bands. We also proposed
    requirements to ensure that Ka-band GSO/FSS systems did not cause
    harmful interference to GSO/FSS systems in adjacent orbital slots.
    However, due to a lack of information, we did not propose specific
    blanket licensing criteria.[^171] We now note that an industry
    technical group has reached a consensus on appropriate technical
    criteria for GSO blanket licensing and has submitted a report
    detailing that consensus.[^172] We have reviewed this report and
    generally adopt the group's recommendations, as specified in the
    attached rules. Pursuant to the rules we are adopting in this
    *Report and Order*, all applications for the blanket licensing of
    GSO/FSS earth stations that meet the requirements of Section 25.138
    will be processed on a routine basis.

86. With respect to NGSO/FSS systems, we note that the technical study
    of ITU Working Part 4-9S on NGSO/FSS interference to fixed stations
    has been completed and an equation has been adopted that can be used
    to specify the space station pfd that provides interference
    protection to fixed stations.[^173] Therefore we adopt this equation
    for determining the maximum allowed pfd of NGSO/FSS space stations
    as a function of the number of satellites in the NGSO system
    constellation, as recommended by technical study groups of the ITU-R
    for inclusion in the International Radio Regulations. However, while
    a decision on the space station pfd is required for the proper
    design of earth stations, we have not been able to develop a
    consensus on the criteria to be used for the blanket licensing of
    NGSO/FSS earth stations and defer decisions on the conditions for
    the blanket licensing of earth stations pending further evaluation.

### GSO/FSS

87. [Blanket Licensing in Unshared Bands]{.underline}. We adopt a
    blanket licensing procedure for GSO/FSS earth stations in the
    unshared 18.58-18.8 GHz, 19.7-20.2 GHz, 28.35-28.6 GHz, and
    29.5-30.0 GHz bands. Applicants in these bands may apply for a
    blanket authorization under which each licensee can construct and
    operate specified numbers and types of qualified earth
    stations.[^174] The license term for a blanket authorization will
    coincide with the underlying space station operating license.

88. In the *18 GHz NPRM*, we proposed that blanket license applicants
    would be required to designate a point of contact where records on
    location and frequency use of satellite earth stations will be
    maintained, in order to ensure that secondary users in these bands
    have the information necessary to avoid causing harmful interference
    to GSO/FSS earth stations. As a result of our decision to prohibit
    secondary use throughout the 18 GHz band, we decline to require
    satellite operators to designate a point of contact.[^175] Moreover,
    in an environment where there will be no secondary use in the band,
    requiring satellite operators to monitor the specific location and
    frequency usage of ubiquitously deployed earth stations could prove
    expensive and difficult.[^176] We also proposed that satellite
    operators obtaining a blanket license would be subject to an annual
    reporting requirement.[^177] Under this proposal, licensees would be
    required to include the number of earth stations actually brought
    into service in a yearly report to the Commission, so that we can
    monitor the development of this service. This policy is consistent
    with the requirements initially placed on Very Small Aperture
    Terminal ("VSAT") blanket licensed earth station licensees in the
    12/14 GHz frequency bands (Ku-band).[^178]

89. Both Loral and TIA-SOUS asserted that they did not object to the
    proposed annual reporting requirement. Pegasus, on the other hand,
    opposed our proposed annual reporting requirement, indicating that
    "\[w\]hile the *NPRM* suggests that this information would permit
    secondary users to avoid causing interference to GSO FSS earth
    stations, Pegasus believes that such avoidance is not possible in a
    situation where the primary service is truly ubiquitous."[^179] We
    believe Pegasus' concerns are moot since we are not adopting any
    secondary designations. As stated above, the adoption of the annual
    reporting requirement would allow the Commission to monitor the
    development of GSO/FSS services in primary bands and is in the
    public interest. Therefore, we adopt our proposal to require an
    annual reporting requirement on blanket licensees. Licensees are
    required to include the number of earth stations actually brought
    into service in a yearly report to the Commission. This annual
    report will be due to the Commission no later than the first day of
    April of each year, for the deployment figures of the preceding
    calendar year.

90. In the *18 GHz NPRM,* we also proposed several technical
    requirements for intra-service sharing.[^180] In the *NPRM*, we
    noted that our existing GSO/FSS licensing policy in other bands is
    based upon uniform 2-degree spacing between adjacent satellites
    operating in the same frequency bands. For example, to implement
    2-degree spacing for GSO/FSS systems in the 4/6 GHz and 12/14 GHz
    frequency bands, we established rules that define uplink and
    downlink power densities[^181] and antenna performance
    standards.[^182] Specifically in the *18 GHz NPRM*, we proposed
    uplink transmit Equivalent Isotropically Radiated Power ("EIRP")
    density limits and downlink pfd limits that provided, in the case of
    the pfd values, for values that were bandwidth dependent, i.e. one
    over a 1 MHz and one over a 40 MHz bandwidth.[^183] These proposals
    initially proved controversial within the GSO/FSS industry,
    resulting in an initial failure to achieve consensus within the
    GSO/FSS Ka-Band Blanket Licensing Industry Working Group.[^184] We
    also proposed that applicants for earth station blanket licensing
    authorization submit to the Commission a technical description of
    how they will comply with the requirement that all Ka-band FSS earth
    stations employ adaptive uplink power control or other methods of
    fade compensation.[^185] Furthermore, we sought comment on whether
    some type of antenna pointing requirement for Ka-band GSO/FSS earth
    stations is necessary, and on procedures for the licensing of
    non-compliant earth stations, and the effect such licensing would
    have on present and future licensees in the band. Additionally,
    noting that the *18 GHz NPRM* proposed pfd values are more
    restrictive than the current pfd limits that apply equally to United
    States Government, United States non-Government, and foreign
    satellite systems, we requested comment on whether any future
    disparity in the operating pfd values between government and
    commercial systems could adversely affect the ability of the latter
    to provide service or could adversely affect the ability of the
    domestic licensee to effect a workable coordination agreement. The
    comments received do not indicate that such a disparity between
    commercial and government pfd limits will have a significant adverse
    impact on non-Government satellite systems. However, to resolve any
    significant problems, the record has supported a solution based upon
    the use of non-conforming earth stations. In cases where a
    non-Government GSO satellite is located in an orbit nearby a
    Government GSO satellite, the non-Government satellite may be
    authorized to exceed the pfd limits adopted in this *Report and
    Order* provided it meets the conditions of Section 25.138(b). This
    rule section requires that applicants provide specified information
    and certify that they have coordinated their operations with all
    satellite systems located within +/- 6 degrees of its orbit. In the
    bands 18.3-18.6 GHz and 19.7-20.2 GHz, NTIA has stated that the
    Government GSO and NGSO networks are presently operating and plan to
    continue to operate in accordance with the pfd limits contained in
    the current ITU Radio Regulations. These pfd limits are -115/-105 dB
    (W/m^2^) in any 1 MHz depending upon the angle of arrival in the
    band 18.3-18.6 GHz. There are currently no PFD limits in the band
    19.7-20.2 GHz.[^186]

91. The record in this proceeding has been supplemented by the filing of
    the Second Report of the GSO/FSS Ka Band Licensing Industry Working
    Group[^187] (*BLWG Second Report)*. A consensus was ultimately
    reached by the participants of the BLWG, detailing consensus
    technical parameters that would allow GSO/FSS blanket licensing.

92. The *BLWG Second Report* made recommendations on the adoption of a
    downlink pfd at the Earth's surface to protect downlinks in the
    United States, and EIRP spectral density from transmitting earth
    stations as a function of off-axis angle to protect uplinks. The
    *BLWG Second Report* also indicated that it does not intend that the
    Commission apply these blanket licensing rules to U.S. licensed
    satellite systems operating outside the United States.[^188] In any
    event, it is beyond the scope of this proceeding to consider such
    international application. The BLWG has addressed earth station
    pointing accuracy and uplink power control, but was not prepared to
    make detailed recommendations on those issues. We are adopting the
    final recommendations of the *BLWG Second Report* as detailed in the
    revised Rules.[^189]

93. In the *18 GHz NPRM*, we proposed that earth stations that did not
    comply with our adopted technical criteria would be subject to
    coordination with adjacent orbital slots. In this *Report and
    Order*, however, in recognition of a consensus that developed in the
    *BLWG Second Report* we adopt specific technical conditions for
    uplink and downlink operations, which obviate the need for
    coordination between non-government GSO/FSS systems in the Ka
    Band*.* However, coordination will continue to be required between
    non-government and government or foreign systems.

94. [Shared Bands.]{.underline} In the *18 GHz NPRM*, we proposed not to
    implement blanket licensing in bands designated for shared
    co-primary use between GSO/FSS and MSS/FL (29.25-29.5 GHz), as well
    as shared for GSO/FSS and terrestrial fixed service use (18.3-18.58
    GHz), in accordance with this *Report and Order*. In an ex parte
    presentation, Hughes suggests, however, that blanket licensing would
    be appropriate for the 29.25-29.5 MHz uplink frequency bands, since
    they are not shared with terrestrial services.[^190] Hughes also
    suggests a streamlined method for licensing downlinks in the
    18.3-18.58 GHz bands, by which the Commission would first approve
    the basic technical characteristics of a large number of identical
    terminals.[^191] Subsequently, a licensee could register the
    specific locations of terminals through a streamlined method.
    Terminals registered with the FCC would receive protection from
    interference from new terrestrial fixed operations. Hughes argues
    that this method would facilitate offering of GSO/FSS to consumers.
    Further exploration of this proposal is warranted. We decline,
    however, to do so in this proceeding based on the lack of a
    sufficient record that: 1) describes in adequate detail how such an
    expedited licensing process would work; and 2) addresses the
    potential consequences of implementing an expedited licensing
    process in bands that are shared between services. Instead, we will
    address these issues in connection with an appropriate future
    proceeding in which the full range of public interest issues,
    including benefits to consumers and impact on other services, such
    as fixed terrestrial and MSS feeder links, can be fully
    assessed.[^192]

### NGSO/FSS

95. In the *18 GHz NPRM*, we proposed to implement a blanket licensing
    regime for NGSO/FSS systems in the 18.8-19.3 and the 28.6-29.1 GHz
    band. However, we stated that we lacked sufficient information to
    propose specific blanket licensing criteria for NGSO systems, and
    requested comment on what type of technical criteria should be
    used.[^193] Commenters generally supported this proposal.[^194]
    Therefore, we will adopt our proposal made in the *18 GHz NPRM* and
    will authorize earth station blanket licensing for NGSO/FSS systems
    in the bands in which NGSO/FSS is designated primary status,
    specifically the 18.8-19.3 GHz and 28.6-29.1 GHz frequency bands.
    The pfd limits for this band are specified in Section 25.208 (f) in
    Appendix A of this *Report and Order*. We recognize that we are not
    adopting specific blanket licensing rules at this time, and instead
    will address specific blanket licensing requirements in these bands
    in a future proceeding.

## BSS Allocation

96. In the *18 GHz NPRM*, we requested comment on the allocation of
    spectrum for the BSS at the 17.3-17.8 GHz frequency band and at the
    24.75-25.25 GHz frequency band for FSS services providing feeder
    links to the BSS. We made this proposal to conform the Commission's
    Rules to the ITU Region 2 allocation that will take effect on April
    1, 2007.[^195] We also sought comment as to the timing of the
    allocation.[^196] In response to our request, interested parties
    requested primary BSS use[^197] and some requested no BSS use.[^198]
    Many terrestrial fixed commenters argued that a BSS allocation is
    premature,[^199] and that such an allocation would mean further
    erosion of FS spectrum.[^200] At the same time, FSS operators argued
    that current BSS spectrum was insufficient to meet a growing
    demand.[^201] We also expressed uncertainty in the *NPRM* as to
    whether sharing would be feasible among the BSS, FSS, and
    terrestrial fixed service operations in these bands and specified
    that appropriate sharing criteria would have to be developed before
    such an allocation could be used.[^202] Most of the commenters
    voiced skepticism that sharing would be possible,[^203] but none
    offered specific evidence that sharing was infeasible under any
    conditions. Finally, some commenters requested an orbital spacing
    policy of 4.5º in the BSS allocation,[^204] though some suggested
    that such a policy be reserved for a later proceeding.[^205] In
    recognition of the fact that the international allocation is not
    effective for approximately seven years, we adopt the following
    allocation and designation decisions, to take effect April 1, 2007:
    in the downlink band, we allocate 400 MHz of spectrum at 17.3-17.7
    GHz for primary BSS use. In the uplink band, we allocate 300 MHz of
    spectrum at 24.75-25.05 GHz for primary FSS Earth-to-space use,
    limited to feeder links for the BSS allocation in the 17.3-17.7 GHz
    band. We allocate 200 MHz of spectrum at 25.05-25.25 GHz for
    co-primary sharing between FSS and the 24 GHz Service, requiring
    coordination between these services. Given our experience in the
    other bands shared between satellite and terrestrial services, we
    believe that the requirement for coordination in the uplink band
    will accomplish, with minimal regulation, our objective of providing
    maximum flexibility of use while ensuring a workable sharing
    environment, as discussed below. While we note that there is a
    difference of 100 megahertz of spectrum between the BSS downlinks
    and the feeder links, we are reluctant to reduce the amount of
    spectrum available for the feeder links at this time. The
    flexibility that this additional spectrum provides might prove quite
    useful to BSS system operators as they tackle the issues of
    local-into-local and regional programming, as well as any occasional
    difficulties that might be encountered during coordination.[^206]

97. In making these allocation and designation decisions, we strive to
    attain a balance that best serves the public interest. Our objective
    is to provide for new satellite services without compromising on our
    intentions to provide adequate, albeit reduced, continuing spectrum
    for the FS. We note that BSS is a rapidly growing service, and that
    additional spectrum will be needed for BSS within the next
    decade.[^207] We also recognize: (1) the importance of preserving
    terrestrial fixed service spectrum to continue supporting important
    existing terrestrial fixed service operations in the 17.7-17.8 GHz
    band; (2) the need to provide spectrum for the migration of
    terrestrial fixed services into that band; and (3) the need to
    provide for the growth of the 24 GHz Service.

98. In order to provide for maximum availability of all these services
    to the public, we conclude that a band segmentation approach will
    ensure that the BSS will be able to provide downlink service to the
    general public in an exclusive allocation and the fixed service will
    similarly be able to maintain existing services in the 17.7-17.8 GHz
    band. We recognize that the ubiquitous nature of BSS services (such
    services are defined as links from the satellite to the general
    public) [^208] preclude successful coordination with a terrestrial
    service that is similarly widespread.[^209] In this *Report and*
    Order, we also adopt a co-primary allocation to the GSO/FSS at
    25.05-25.25 GHz, limited to BSS feeder links, in order to give full
    accommodation of spectrum needs to all services. We note that the
    successful implementation of this allocation will require the
    development of sharing criteria that will be considered in a future
    rulemaking proceeding.

99. In the *18 GHz NPRM*, we recognized that allocating spectrum at
    17.3-17.8 GHz and 24.75-25.25 GHz will conform this band plan to the
    ITU Region 2 allocation of BSS spectrum at 17.3‑17.8 GHz.[^210] ITU
    footnote S5.517 provides that the international Region 2 allocation
    for BSS will not take effect until April 1, 2007.[^211] DIRECTV
    requests that we not wait until 2007 to make this allocation
    domestically, but rather that we implement it as soon as possible,
    arguing that there is no reason to further constrain the use of the
    band prior to that date.[^212] While we do not believe that
    implementing the allocation immediately would be prudent,[^213] we
    agree to make the decision now to make an allocation that will be
    effective April 2007, so as to provide all parties with sufficient
    notice and time to design their systems to use this spectrum in the
    most efficient manner. Therefore, within this context, we decide now
    to make the downlink BSS and GSO/FSS allocations effective April
    1, 2007. We are, however, stopping the allocation for the BSS at
    17.7 GHz. This will provide 400 MHz of spectrum to the BSS at
    17.3-17.7 GHz. Considering the amount of spectrum being lost by the
    fixed service as a result of this proceeding, we believe it is
    important to keep as much spectrum available to the terrestrial
    fixed service as possible, for as long as possible, to help in the
    relocation of displaced facilities. If, as we proceed with the
    terrestrial fixed service relocation efforts at 18 GHz and begin the
    process of developing service rules for the 17 GHz BSS, we determine
    that terrestrial fixed relocation spectrum requirements are not as
    demanding as predicted, we may re-examine the availability of all or
    a part of the 17.7-17.8 GHz band for BSS applications. Given the
    record of this proceeding, however, we must at this time ensure that
    this spectrum is available for terrestrial fixed service operations.

## 4.5 Degree Spacing

100. In its comments, Directv proposes a 4.5º spacing environment in the
     17.3-17.7 GHz band.[^214] We find that it is premature to adopt
     4.5º spacing because these allocations will not become effective
     for some time and because such spacing might unduly restrict the
     ability to share the band.[^215] Additionally, there could be
     significant changes in technology during this period. Thus, we will
     address orbital spacing in a future proceeding that relates to
     service rules for this new allocation.[^216]

101. Further, we defer any decision on a pfd for this primary downlink
     band pending a future BSS rulemaking.

## 24.75-25.25 GHz Uplink

102. In the *18 GHz NPRM,* we proposed a primary sub-band at 24.75-25.05
     GHz and a co-primary sub-band at 25.05-25.25 GHz. In this *Report
     and Order*, we adopt these allocations to provide the spectrum
     necessary for this service. We limit the FSS allocation at
     24.75-25.25 GHz to feeder links to the BSS. As in the case of the
     18.3-18.58 GHz bands, in order to ensure successful sharing and an
     interference-free environment, we have decided to adopt an
     allocation structure that ensures such success. The success of
     sharing depends upon the prudent design and placement of earth
     stations and future 24 GHz Service stations, and the pointing of
     fixed station receivers with respect to transmitting earth
     stations. Because interference can only be experienced at the
     receiver, and the only terrestrial receivers in the shared band are
     at the 24 GHz Service station hubs, and not at the locations of the
     24 GHz Service users,[^217] we will resolve this situation with a
     requirement for coordination rather than limiting the number of
     earth stations.

103. Because the location of earth stations is not known at this time 24
     GHz Service receivers can not be set up now to avoid them. While we
     will require coordination for both services, we cannot specify the
     coordination trigger at this time. While we believe we should make
     a decision on the allocation to the FSS feeder link now, we do not
     make it effective until April 1, 2007, to correspond to the
     downlink allocations that the service will feed. It is our further
     goal to minimize the impacts on both services in a sharing
     environment.

104. We believe that the operational characteristics of the 24 GHz
     Service may provide solutions to potential interference received
     from earth station transmitters and that avoiding the pointing of
     fixed station transmitters at the orbit should eliminate space
     station interference.[^218] The nature of these characteristics is
     deferred to a future service rules proceeding for the FSS feeder
     links.

105. The Commission also recognizes the parallel events affecting the 24
     GHz Service operations at 24 GHz and notes that an NPRM concerning
     service rules for the 24 GHz Service has just been released.[^219]
     We also note that the rules relevant to 24 GHz Service stations in
     this proceeding are subject to the outcome of the 24 GHz Service
     rules proceeding.

106. We stress that while the full extent of interference between the 24
     GHz Service and FSS stations providing feeder links for BSS is not
     known at this time, we believe sharing is feasible because of the
     limited number of expected BSS feeder link stations and the fact
     that potential interference to the 24 GHz Service would be
     experienced only at the hub receivers and not by the 24 GHz Service
     subscribers.[^220] Therefore, by adopting a shared allocation we
     establish the basis for both services to provide service to the
     public in this band, a balance that can be struck between the
     competing interests of BSS/FSS and fixed services.[^221] We find it
     in the public interest to give each industry a large part of the
     whole rather than barring either service completely from a given
     allocation. Because sharing is possible, we implement a sharing
     environment so as to provide the most efficient use of the
     spectrum, thereby ensuring the greatest possibility of public
     choice and resultant competition between services.

# PROCEDURAL INFORMATION

107. *Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.* The Final Regulatory
     Flexibility Analysis for this *Report and Order*, pursuant to the
     Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. § 604, is contained in
     Appendix B.

108. For further information concerning this proceeding, contact Steve
     Selwyn at (202) 418-2160, internet: sselwyn@fcc.gov, International
     Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 20554.

# ORDERING CLAUSES

109. IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 301, 302,
     303(c), 303(e), 303(f), 303(r) and 403 of the Communications Act of
     1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 151, 154(i), 154(j), 301, 302,
     303(c), 303(e), 303(f), 303(r), and 403, this *Report and Order* IS
     ADOPTED and that Parts 2, 25, 74, 76, and 101 of the Commission\'s
     Rules ARE AMENDED, as specified in Appendix A, effective 30 days
     after publication in the Federal Register.

110. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, as
     required by Section 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act and as
     set forth in Appendix B, IS ADOPTED.

111. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission\'s Consumer Information
     Bureau SHALL SEND a copy of this *Report and Order*, including the
     Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis to the Chief Counsel for
     Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

112. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this proceeding is terminated pursuant
     to Sections 4i and 4j of the Communications Act of 1934, as
     amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154(i) and 154(j).

> FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
>
> Magalie Roman Salas
>
> Secretary

# APPENDIX A: Final Rules {#appendix-a-final-rules .unnumbered}

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, parts 2, 21, 25, 74, 78, and
101 of title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations are amended as
follows:

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

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

AUTHORITY: 47 U.S.C. 154, 302, 303, 307, 336, and 337, unless otherwise
noted.

113. Amend § 2.106 as follows:

a\. Revise pages 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, and 72 of the Table of Frequency
Allocations.

b\. In the list of United States footnotes, revise footnotes US 255 and
US334.

c\. In the list of non-Federal government footnotes, revise footnote
NG144 and add footnotes NG163, NG164, NG165, NG166, and NG167 .

The additions and revisions read as follows:

**§ 2.106 Table of Frequency Allocations.**

<table style="width:100%;">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 15%" />
<col style="width: 15%" />
<col style="width: 15%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 10%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 10%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 3%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="10">14.5-18.3 GHz (SHF)</td>
<td colspan="4">Page 67</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="4">International Table</td>
<td colspan="5">United States Table</td>
<td colspan="4">FCC Rule Part(s)</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>Region 1</td>
<td>Region 2</td>
<td>Region 3</td>
<td colspan="2">Federal Government</td>
<td colspan="2" rowspan="11">Non-Federal Government</td>
<td colspan="4"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="4"><p>14.5-14.8</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) S5.510</p>
<p>MOBILE</p>
<p>Space research</p></td>
<td><p>14.5-14.7145</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>Mobile</p>
<p>Space research</p></td>
<td colspan="2">14.5-15.1365</td>
<td colspan="4"></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="4"></td>
<td rowspan="2"><p>14.7145-15.1365</p>
<p>MOBILE</p>
<p>Fixed</p>
<p>Space research</p>
<p>US310</p></td>
<td colspan="2" rowspan="2"><p>14.7145-15.1365</p>
<p>US310</p></td>
<td colspan="4" rowspan="2"></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="4"><p>14.8-15.35</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>MOBILE</p>
<p>Space research</p></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="4"></td>
<td rowspan="2"><p>15.1365-15.35</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>Mobile</p>
<p>Space research</p>
<p>S5.339 US211</p></td>
<td colspan="2" rowspan="2"><p>15.1365-15.35</p>
<p>S5.339 US211</p></td>
<td colspan="4" rowspan="2"></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="4">S5.339</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="4"><p>15.35-15.4</p>
<p>EARTH EXPLORATION-SATELLITE (passive)</p>
<p>RADIO ASTRONOMY</p>
<p>SPACE RESEARCH (passive)</p>
<p>S5.340 S5.511</p></td>
<td><p>15.35-15.4</p>
<p>EARTH EXPLORATION-SATELLITE (passive)</p>
<p>RADIO ASTRONOMY US74</p>
<p>SPACE RESEARCH (passive)</p>
<p>US246</p></td>
<td colspan="4"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="4"><p>15.4-15.43</p>
<p>AERONAUTICAL RADIONAVIGATION</p>
<p>S5.511D</p></td>
<td><p>15.4-15.7</p>
<p>AERONAUTICAL RADIONAVIGATION US260</p></td>
<td colspan="4">Aviation (87)</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="4"><p>15.43-15.63</p>
<p>FIXED SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) (Earth-to-space) S5.511A</p>
<p>AERONAUTICAL RADIONAVIGATION</p>
<p>S5.511C</p></td>
<td></td>
<td colspan="4"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="4"><p>15.63-15.7</p>
<p>AERONAUTICAL RADIONAVIGATION</p>
<p>S5.511D</p></td>
<td>733 797 US211</td>
<td colspan="4"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="4"><p>15.7-16.6</p>
<p>RADIOLOCATION</p>
<p>S5.512 S5.513</p></td>
<td><p>15.7-16.6</p>
<p>RADIOLOCATION US110</p>
<p>G59</p></td>
<td colspan="2"><p>15.7-17.2</p>
<p>Radiolocation US110</p></td>
<td colspan="4">Private Land Mobile (90)</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

<table>
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 16%" />
<col style="width: 16%" />
<col style="width: 16%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 11%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 11%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="3"><p>16.6-17.1</p>
<p>RADIOLOCATION</p>
<p>Space research (deep space) (Earth-to-space)</p>
<p>S5.512 S5.513</p></td>
<td colspan="2"><p>16.6-17.1</p>
<p>RADIOLOCATION US110</p>
<p>G59</p>
<p>Space research (deep</p>
<p>space) (Earth-to-space)</p></td>
<td colspan="2" rowspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="4"><p>17.1-17.2</p>
<p>RADIOLOCATION</p>
<p>S5.512 S5.513</p></td>
<td><p>17.1-17.2</p>
<p>RADIOLOCATION US110</p>
<p>G59</p></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="4"><p>17.2-17.3</p>
<p>EARTH EXPLORATION-SATELLITE (active)</p>
<p>RADIOLOCATION</p>
<p>SPACE RESEARCH (active)</p>
<p>S5.512 S5.513 S5.513A</p></td>
<td><p>17.2-17.3</p>
<p>RADIOLOCATION US110</p>
<p>G59</p>
<p>Earth exploration-satellite</p>
<p>(active)</p>
<p>Space research (active)</p></td>
<td colspan="2"><p>17.2-17.3</p>
<p>Radiolocation US110</p>
<p>Earth exploration-satellite</p>
<p>(active)</p>
<p>Space research (active)</p></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><p>17.3-17.7</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(Earth-to-space) S5.516</p>
<p>Radiolocation</p>
<p>S5.514</p></td>
<td><p>17.3-17.7</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(Earth-to-space) S5.516</p>
<p>BROADCASTING-</p>
<p>SATELLITE</p>
<p>Radiolocation</p>
<p>S5.514 S5.515 S5.517</p></td>
<td><p>17.3-17.7</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(Earth-to-space) S5.516</p>
<p>Radiolocation</p>
<p>S5.514</p></td>
<td colspan="2"><p>17.3-17.7</p>
<p>Radiolocation US259 G59</p></td>
<td colspan="2"><p>17.3-17.7</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(Earth-to-space) US271</p>
<p>BROADCASTING-</p>
<p>SATELLITE NG163</p>
<p>US259</p></td>
<td colspan="2"><p>Satellite</p>
<p>Communications (25)</p>
<p>Direct Broadcast Satellite</p>
<p>(100)</p></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><p>17.7-18.1</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth) S5.484A</p>
<p>(Earth-to-space) S5.516</p>
<p>MOBILE</p></td>
<td><p>17.7-17.8</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth)</p>
<p>(Earth-to-space) S5.516</p>
<p>BROADCASTING-</p>
<p>SATELLITE</p>
<p>Mobile S5.518</p>
<p>S5.515 S5.517</p></td>
<td><p>17.7-18.1</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth) S5.484A</p>
<p>(Earth-to-space) S5.516</p>
<p>MOBILE</p></td>
<td colspan="2">17.7-17.8</td>
<td colspan="2"><p>17.7-17.8</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(Earth-to-space) US271</p>
<p>NG144</p></td>
<td colspan="2"><p>Satellite</p>
<p>Communications (25)</p>
<p>Auxiliary Broadcasting</p>
<p>(74)</p>
<p>Cable TV Relay (78)</p>
<p>Fixed Microwave (101)</p></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td></td>
<td><p>17.8-18.1</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth) S5.484A</p>
<p>(Earth-to-space) S5.516</p>
<p>MOBILE</p></td>
<td></td>
<td colspan="2"><p>17.8-18.3</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth) G117</p></td>
<td colspan="2" rowspan="3"><p>17.8-18.3</p>
<p>FIXED</p></td>
<td colspan="2"><p>Auxiliary Broadcasting</p>
<p>(74)</p>
<p>Cable TV Relay (78)</p>
<p>Fixed Microwave (101)</p></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="4"><p>18.1-18.4</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) S5.484A (Earth-to-space) S5.520</p>
<p>MOBILE</p>
<p>S5.519 S5.521</p></td>
<td>S5.519 US334</td>
<td colspan="2">S5.519 US334 NG144</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="4"></td>
<td><p>See next page for</p>
<p>18.3-18.6 GHz</p></td>
<td colspan="2"><p>See next page for</p>
<p>18.3-18.58 GHz</p></td>
<td><p>See next page for</p>
<p>18.3-18.58 GHz</p></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

<table style="width:100%;">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 15%" />
<col style="width: 15%" />
<col style="width: 15%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 10%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 10%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 3%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="10">18.3-22.5 GHz (SHF)</td>
<td colspan="4">Page 69</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="4">International Table</td>
<td colspan="5">United States Table</td>
<td colspan="4">FCC Rule Part(s)</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>Region 1</td>
<td>Region 2</td>
<td>Region 3</td>
<td colspan="2">Federal Government</td>
<td colspan="2" rowspan="4">Non-Federal Government</td>
<td colspan="4"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="4">See previous page for 18.1-18.4 GHz</td>
<td><p>18.3-18.6</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth) G117</p></td>
<td colspan="2"><p>18.3-18.58</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE (space-</p>
<p>to-Earth) NG164</p></td>
<td colspan="4" rowspan="2"><p>Satellite</p>
<p>Communications (25)</p>
<p>Auxiliary Broadcast. (74)</p>
<p>Cable TV Relay (78)</p>
<p>Fixed Microwave (101)</p></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="4"><p>18.4-18.6</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) S5.484A</p>
<p>MOBILE</p></td>
<td rowspan="2">US334</td>
<td colspan="2">US334 NG144</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="4"></td>
<td colspan="2"><p>18.58-18.6</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE (space-</p>
<p>to-Earth) NG164</p>
<p>US334 NG144</p></td>
<td colspan="4"><p>Satellite</p>
<p>Communications (25)</p></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><p>18.6-18.8</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth) S5.523</p>
<p>MOBILE except</p>
<p>aeronautical mobile</p>
<p>Earth exploration-satellite</p>
<p>(passive)</p>
<p>Space research (passive)</p>
<p>S5.522</p></td>
<td><p>18.6-18.8</p>
<p>EARTH EXPLORATION-</p>
<p>SATELLITE (passive)</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth) S5.523</p>
<p>MOBILE except</p>
<p>aeronautical mobile</p>
<p>SPACE RESEARCH</p>
<p>(passive)</p>
<p>S5.222</p></td>
<td><p>18.6-18.8</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth) S5.523</p>
<p>MOBILE except</p>
<p>aeronautical mobile</p>
<p>Space research (passive)</p>
<p>S5.522</p></td>
<td colspan="2"><p>18.6-18.8</p>
<p>EARTH EXPLORATION-</p>
<p>SATELLITE (passive)</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth) US255</p>
<p>G117</p>
<p>SPACE RESEARCH</p>
<p>(passive)</p>
<p>US254 US334</p></td>
<td colspan="2" rowspan="3"><p>18.6-18.8</p>
<p>EARTH EXPLORATION-</p>
<p>SATELLITE (passive)</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth) US255</p>
<p>NG164</p>
<p>SPACE RESEARCH</p>
<p>(passive)</p>
<p>US254 US334 NG144</p></td>
<td colspan="4"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="4"><p>18.8-19.3</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) S5.523A</p>
<p>MOBILE</p></td>
<td><p>18.8-20.2</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth) G117</p></td>
<td colspan="2"><p>18.8-19.3</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth) NG165</p>
<p>US334 NG144</p></td>
<td colspan="4"></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="4"><p>19.3-19.7</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) (Earth-space) S5.523B S5.523C
S5.523D S5.523E</p>
<p>MOBILE</p></td>
<td></td>
<td colspan="2"><p>19.3-19.7</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE (space-</p>
<p>to-Earth) NG166</p>
<p>US334 NG144</p></td>
<td colspan="4"><p>Satellite</p>
<p>Communications (25)</p>
<p>Auxiliary Broadcast. (74)</p>
<p>Cable TV Relay (78)</p>
<p>Fixed Microwave (101)</p></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><p>19.7-20.1</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth) S5.484A</p>
<p>Mobile-satellite</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth)</p>
<p>S5.524</p></td>
<td><p>19.7-20.1</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth) S5.484A</p>
<p>MOBILE-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth)</p>
<p>S5.524 S5.525 S5.526 S5.527 S5.528 S5.529</p></td>
<td><p>19.7-20.1</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth) S5.484A</p>
<p>Mobile-satellite</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth)</p>
<p>S5.524</p></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2"><p>19.7-20.1</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth)</p>
<p>MOBILE-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth)</p>
<p>S5.525 S5.526 S5.527 S5.528 S5.529 US334</p></td>
<td colspan="4"><p>Satellite</p>
<p>Communications (25)</p></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

<table>
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 15%" />
<col style="width: 15%" />
<col style="width: 15%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 15%" />
<col style="width: 13%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="4"><p>20.1-20.2</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) S5.484A</p>
<p>MOBILE-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth)</p>
<p>S5.524 S5.525 S5.526 S5.527 S5.528</p></td>
<td>US334</td>
<td colspan="2"><p>20.1-20.2</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth)</p>
<p>MOBILE-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth)</p>
<p>S5.525 S5.526 S5.527 S5.528 US334</p></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="4"><p>20.2-21.2</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth)</p>
<p>MOBILE-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth)</p>
<p>Standard frequency and time signal-satellite (space-to-Earth)</p>
<p>S5.524</p></td>
<td><p>20.2-21.2</p>
<p>FIXED-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth)</p>
<p>MOBILE-SATELLITE</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth)</p>
<p>Standard frequency and</p>
<p>time signal-satellite</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth)</p>
<p>G117</p></td>
<td colspan="2"><p>20.2-21.2</p>
<p>Standard frequency and</p>
<p>time signal-satellite</p>
<p>(space-to-Earth)</p></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="4"><p>21.2-21.4</p>
<p>EARTH EXPLORATION-SATELLITE (passive)</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>MOBILE</p>
<p>SPACE RESEARCH (passive)</p></td>
<td colspan="4" rowspan="2"><p>21.2-21.4</p>
<p>EARTH EXPLORATION-SATELLITE (passive)</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>MOBILE</p>
<p>SPACE RESEARCH (passive)</p>
<p>US263</p></td>
<td colspan="3">Fixed Microwave (101)</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><p>21.4-22</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>MOBILE</p>
<p>BROADCASTING-</p>
<p>SATELLITE S5.530</p></td>
<td><p>21.4-22</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>MOBILE</p></td>
<td><p>21.4-22</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>MOBILE</p>
<p>BROADCASTING-</p>
<p>SATELLITE S5.530</p>
<p>S5.531</p></td>
<td><p>21.4-22</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>MOBILE</p></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="4"><p>22-22.21</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>MOBILE except aeronautical mobile</p>
<p>S5.149</p></td>
<td colspan="4"><p>22-22.21</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>MOBILE except aeronautical mobile</p>
<p>S5.149</p></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="4"><p>22.21-22.5</p>
<p>EARTH EXPLORATION-SATELLITE (passive)</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>MOBILE except aeronautical mobile</p>
<p>RADIO ASTRONOMY</p>
<p>SPACE RESEARCH (passive)</p>
<p>S5.149 S5.532</p></td>
<td colspan="4"><p>22.21-22.5</p>
<p>EARTH EXPLORATION-SATELLITE (passive)</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>MOBILE except aeronautical mobile</p>
<p>RADIO ASTRONOMY</p>
<p>SPACE RESEARCH (passive)</p>
<p>S5.149 US263</p></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

Page 70

<table style="width:100%;">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 15%" />
<col style="width: 15%" />
<col style="width: 15%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 10%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 10%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 3%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="10">22.5-27.5 GHz (SHF)</td>
<td colspan="4">Page 71</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="4">International Table</td>
<td colspan="5">United States Table</td>
<td colspan="4">FCC Rule Part(s)</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>Region 1</td>
<td>Region 2</td>
<td>Region 3</td>
<td colspan="2">Federal Government</td>
<td colspan="2" rowspan="7">Non-Federal Government</td>
<td colspan="4"></td>
<td colspan="3" rowspan="5"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="4"><p>22.5-22.55</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>MOBILE</p></td>
<td><p>22.5-22.55</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>MOBILE</p>
<p>US211</p></td>
<td colspan="4">Fixed Microwave (101)</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="4"><p>22.55-23.55</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>INTER-SATELLITE</p>
<p>MOBILE</p>
<p>S5.149</p></td>
<td><p>22.55-23.55</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>INTER-SATELLITE</p>
<p>MOBILE</p>
<p>S5.149 US278</p></td>
<td colspan="4"><p>Satellite</p>
<p>Communications (25)</p>
<p>Fixed Microwave (101)</p></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="4"><p>23.55-23.6</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>MOBILE</p></td>
<td><p>23.55-23.6</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>MOBILE</p></td>
<td colspan="4">Fixed Microwave (101)</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="4"><p>23.6-24</p>
<p>EARTH EXPLORATION-SATELLITE (passive)</p>
<p>RADIO ASTRONOMY</p>
<p>SPACE RESEARCH (passive)</p>
<p>S5.340</p></td>
<td><p>23.6-24</p>
<p>EARTH EXPLORATION-SATELLITE (passive)</p>
<p>RADIO ASTRONOMY US74</p>
<p>SPACE RESEARCH (passive)</p>
<p>US246</p></td>
<td colspan="4"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="4"><p>24-24.05</p>
<p>AMATEUR</p>
<p>AMATEUR-SATELLITE</p>
<p>S5.150</p></td>
<td><p>24-24.05</p>
<p>S5.150 US211</p></td>
<td colspan="2"><p>24-24.05</p>
<p>AMATEUR</p>
<p>AMATEUR-SATELLITE</p>
<p>S5.150 US211</p></td>
<td colspan="4"><p>ISM Equipment (18)</p>
<p>Amateur (97)</p></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="4"><p>24.05-24.25</p>
<p>RADIOLOCATION</p>
<p>Amateur</p>
<p>Earth exploration-satellite (active)</p>
<p>S5.150</p></td>
<td><p>24.05-24.25</p>
<p>RADIOLOCATION US110</p>
<p>G59</p>
<p>Earth exploration-satellite</p>
<p>(active)</p>
<p>S5.150</p></td>
<td colspan="2"><p>24.05-24.25</p>
<p>Radiolocation US110</p>
<p>Amateur</p>
<p>Earth exploration-satellite</p>
<p>(active)</p>
<p>S5.150</p></td>
<td colspan="4"><p>ISM Equipment (18)</p>
<p>Private Land Mobile (90)</p>
<p>Amateur (97)</p></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><p>24.25-24.45</p>
<p>FIXED</p></td>
<td><p>24.25-24.45</p>
<p>RADIONAVIGATION</p></td>
<td><p>24.25-24.45</p>
<p>RADIONAVIGATION</p>
<p>FIXED</p>
<p>MOBILE</p></td>
<td colspan="2">24.25-24.45</td>
<td colspan="2"><p>24.25-24.45 RADIONAVIGATION</p>
<p>FIXED</p></td>
<td colspan="4"><p>Aviation (87)</p>
<p>Fixed Microwave (101)</p></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
| 24        | 24        | 24        | 24        |           | Sa      |
| .45-24.75 | .45-24.65 | .45-24.65 | .45-24.65 |           | tellite |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
| FIXED     | INTER-    | FIXED     | INTER-    |           | Communi |
|           | SATELLITE |           | SATELLITE |           | cations |
| INTER-    |           | INTER-    |           |           | (25)    |
| SATELLITE | RADION    | SATELLITE | RADION    |           |         |
|           | AVIGATION |           | AVIGATION |           |         |
|           |           | MOBILE    |           |           |         |
|           | S5.533    |           | S5.533    |           |         |
|           |           | RADION    |           |           |         |
|           |           | AVIGATION |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
|           |           | S5.533    |           |           |         |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
|           | 24        | 24        | 24        |           |         |
|           | .65-24.75 | .65-24.75 | .65-24.75 |           |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
|           | INTER-    | FIXED     | INTER-    |           |         |
|           | SATELLITE |           | SATELLITE |           |         |
|           |           | INTER-    |           |           |         |
|           | RADIOLOCA | SATELLITE | RADIO     |           |         |
|           | TION-SAT- |           | LOCATION- |           |         |
|           |           | MOBILE    | SATELLITE |           |         |
|           | ELLITE    |           | (Earth-   |           |         |
|           | (Earth-   | S5.533    | to-space) |           |         |
|           | to-space) | S5.534    |           |           |         |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
| 24        | 24        | 24        | 24        | 24        | Sa      |
| .75-25.25 | .75-25.25 | .75-25.25 | .75-25.05 | .75-25.05 | tellite |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
| FIXED     | FIXED-    | FIXED     | RADION    | FIXED-    | Communi |
|           | SATELLITE |           | AVIGATION | SATELLITE | cations |
|           |           | FIXED-    |           |           | (25)    |
|           | (Earth-   | SATELLITE |           | (Earth-   | A       |
|           | to-space) |           |           | to-space) | viation |
|           | S5.535    | (Earth-   |           | NG167     | (87)    |
|           |           | to-space) |           |           |         |
|           |           | S5.535    |           | RADION    |         |
|           |           |           |           | AVIGATION |         |
|           |           | MOBILE    |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
|           |           | S5.534    |           |           |         |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
|           |           |           | 25        | 25        | Sa      |
|           |           |           | .05-25.25 | .05-25.25 | tellite |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           | FIXED-    | Communi |
|           |           |           |           | SATELLITE | cations |
|           |           |           |           |           | (25)    |
|           |           |           |           | (Earth-   |         |
|           |           |           |           | to-space) | A       |
|           |           |           |           | NG167     | viation |
|           |           |           |           |           | (87)    |
|           |           |           |           | FIXED     |         |
|           |           |           |           |           | Fixed   |
|           |           |           |           | RADION    | Mi      |
|           |           |           |           | AVIGATION | crowave |
|           |           |           |           |           | (101)   |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
| 2         |           |           | 2         | 25.25-27  | Note:   |
| 5.25-25.5 |           |           | 5.25-25.5 |           | In its  |
|           |           |           |           | Standard  | *M      |
| FIXED     |           |           | FIXED     | frequency | anual*, |
|           |           |           |           | and       | NTIA    |
| INTER-    |           |           | MOBILE    |           | has     |
| SATELLITE |           |           |           | time      | added a |
| S5.536    |           |           | Standard  | signal-   | primary |
|           |           |           | frequency | satellite | i       |
| MOBILE    |           |           | and time  | (Earth-   | nter-sa |
|           |           |           |           |           | tellite |
| Standard  |           |           | signal-   | to space) | service |
| frequency |           |           | satellite |           | all     |
| and time  |           |           | (         | Earth     | ocation |
| signal-   |           |           | Earth-to- | exp       | to the  |
| satellite |           |           |           | loration- | band    |
| (Earth-   |           |           | space)    | satellite | 25.     |
| to-space) |           |           |           |           | 25-27.5 |
|           |           |           |           | (space-   | GHz,    |
|           |           |           |           | to-space) | limited |
|           |           |           |           |           | the use |
|           |           |           |           |           | of this |
|           |           |           |           |           | all     |
|           |           |           |           |           | ocation |
|           |           |           |           |           | by      |
|           |           |           |           |           | a       |
|           |           |           |           |           | dopting |
|           |           |           |           |           | f       |
|           |           |           |           |           | ootnote |
|           |           |           |           |           | S5.536, |
|           |           |           |           |           | and has |
|           |           |           |           |           | changed |
|           |           |           |           |           | the     |
|           |           |           |           |           | dire    |
|           |           |           |           |           | ctional |
|           |           |           |           |           | in      |
|           |           |           |           |           | dicator |
|           |           |           |           |           | for the |
|           |           |           |           |           | Earth   |
|           |           |           |           |           | explora |
|           |           |           |           |           | tion-sa |
|           |           |           |           |           | tellite |
|           |           |           |           |           | service |
|           |           |           |           |           | all     |
|           |           |           |           |           | ocation |
|           |           |           |           |           | in the  |
|           |           |           |           |           | band    |
|           |           |           |           |           | 25.5-27 |
|           |           |           |           |           | GHz     |
|           |           |           |           |           | from    |
|           |           |           |           |           | space-t |
|           |           |           |           |           | o-space |
|           |           |           |           |           | to      |
|           |           |           |           |           | s       |
|           |           |           |           |           | pace-to |
|           |           |           |           |           | -Earth. |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
| 25.5-27   |           |           | 25.5-27   |           |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
| EARTH     |           |           | FIXED     |           |         |
| EXP       |           |           |           |           |         |
| LORATION- |           |           | MOBILE    |           |         |
| SATELLITE |           |           |           |           |         |
| (space-   |           |           | Standard  |           |         |
| to-Earth) |           |           | frequency |           |         |
| S5.536A   |           |           | and time  |           |         |
| S5.536B   |           |           |           |           |         |
|           |           |           | signal-   |           |         |
| FIXED     |           |           | satellite |           |         |
|           |           |           | (         |           |         |
| INTER-    |           |           | Earth-to- |           |         |
| SATELLITE |           |           |           |           |         |
| S5.536    |           |           | space)    |           |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
| MOBILE    |           |           | Earth     |           |         |
|           |           |           | exp       |           |         |
| Standard  |           |           | loration- |           |         |
| frequency |           |           | satellite |           |         |
| and time  |           |           |           |           |         |
| signal-   |           |           | (space-   |           |         |
| satellite |           |           | to-space) |           |         |
| (Earth-   |           |           |           |           |         |
| to-space) |           |           |           |           |         |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
| 27-27.5   | 27-27.5   |           | 27-27.5   | 27-27.5   |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
| FIXED     | FIXED     |           | FIXED     | Earth     |         |
|           |           |           |           | exp       |         |
| INTER-    | FIXED-    |           | MOBILE    | loration- |         |
| SATELLITE | SATELLITE |           |           | satellite |         |
| S5.536    | (Earth-   |           |           |           |         |
|           | to-space) |           |           | (space-   |         |
| MOBILE    |           |           |           | to-space) |         |
|           | INTER-    |           |           |           |         |
|           | SATELLITE |           |           |           |         |
|           | S5.536    |           |           |           |         |
|           | S5.537    |           |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
|           | MOBILE    |           |           |           |         |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+

Page 72

\* \* \* \* \*

United States (US) Footnotes

\* \* \* \* \*

US255 In addition to any other applicable limits, the power flux-density
across the 200 MHz band 18.6-18.8 GHz produced at the surface of the
Earth by emissions from a space station under assumed free-space
propagation conditions shall not exceed -95 dB(W/m2) for all angles of
arrival. This limit may be exceeded by up to 3 dB for no more than 5% of
the time.

\* \* \* \* \*

US334 In the band 17.8-20.2 GHz, Government space stations in both
geostationary (GSO) and non-geostationary satellite orbits (NGSO) and
associated earth stations in the fixed-satellite service
(space-to-Earth) may be authorized on a primary basis. For a Government
geostationary satellite network to operate on a primary basis, the space
station shall be located outside the arc, measured from east to west, 70
West Longitude to 120 West Longitude. Coordination between Government
fixed-satellite systems and non-Government space and terrestrial systems
operating in accordance with the United States Table of Frequency
Allocations is required.

\(a\) In the sub-band 17.8-19.7 GHz, the power flux-density at the
surface of the Earth produced by emissions from a Government GSO space
station or from a Government space station in a NGSO constellation of 50
or fewer satellites, for all conditions and for all methods of
modulation, shall not exceed the following values in any 1 MHz band:

(1) --115 dB(W/m^2^) for angles of arrival above the horizontal plane ()
    between 0° and 5°,

(2) --115 + 0.5( -- 5) dB(W/m^2^) for between 5° and 25°, and

\(3\) --105 dB(W/m^2^) for between 25° and 90°.

\(b\) In the sub-band 17.8-19.3 GHz, the power-flux density at the
surface of the Earth produced by emissions from a Government space
station in an NGSO constellation of 51 or more satellites, for all
conditions and for all methods of modulation, shall not exceed the
following values in any 1 MHz band:

(1) --115 -- X dB(W/m^2^) for between 0° and 5°,

(2) --115 -- X + ((10 + X)/20)( -- 5) dB(W/m^2^) for between 5° and 25°,
    and

\(3\) --105 dB(W/m^2^) for between 25° and 90°; where X is defined as a
function of the number of satellites, n, in an NGSO constellation as
follows:

For n 288, X = (5/119) (n -- 50) dB; and

For n \> 288, X = (1/69) (n + 402) dB.

\* \* \* \* \*

Non-Federal Government (NG) Footnotes

\* \* \* \* \*

NG144 Stations authorized as of September 9, 1983 to use frequencies in
the bands 17.7-18.58 GHz and 19.3-19.7 GHz may, upon proper application,
continue operations. Fixed stations authorized in the band 18.58-19.3
GHz that remain co-primary under the provisions of §§ 21.901(e),
74.502(c), 74.602(g), 78.18(a)(4), and 101.174(r) may continue
operations consistent with the provisions of those sections.

\* \* \* \* \*

NG163 The allocation to the broadcasting-satellite service in the band
17.3-17.7 GHz shall come into effect on 1 April 2007.

NG164 The use of the band 18.3-18.8 GHz by the fixed-satellite service
(space-to-Earth) is limited to systems in the geostationary-satellite
orbit.

NG165 The use of the band 18.8-19.3 GHz by the fixed-satellite service
(space-to-Earth) is limited to systems in non-geostationary-satellite
orbits.

NG166 The use of the band 19.3-19.7 GHz by the fixed-satellite service
(space-to-Earth) is limited to feeder links for the mobile-satellite
service.

NG167 The use of the fixed-satellite service (Earth-to-space) in the
band 24.75-25.25 GHz is limited to feeder links for the
broadcasting-satellite service operating in the band 17.3-17.7 GHz. The
allocation to the fixed-satellite service (Earth-to-space) in the band
24.75-25.25 shall come into effect on 1 April 2007.

\* \* \* \* \*

PART 21\--DOMESTIC PUBLIC FIXED RADIO SERVICES

114. The authority citation for part 21 continues to read as follows:

AUTHORITY: Secs. 1, 2, 4, 201-205, 208, 215, 218, 303, 307, 313, 403,
404, 410, 602, 48 Stat. as amended, 1064, 1066, 1070-1073, 1076, 1077,
1080,1082, 1083, 1087, 1094, 1098, 1102; 47U.S.C. 151, 154, 201-205,
208, 215, 218, 303, 307, 313, 314, 403, 404, 602; 47 U.S.C. 552, 554.

115. Section 21.901 is amended by revising paragraph (e) to read as
     follows:

**§ 21.901 Frequencies**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(e\) Frequencies in the band segments 18,580-18,820 MHz and
18,920-19,160 MHz that were licensed or had applications pending before
the Commission as of September 18, 1998 may continue those operations
for point-to-point return links from a subscriber\'s location on a
shared co-primary basis with other services under Parts 25, 74, 78 and
101 of the Commission\'s rules until (date 10 years from adoption of
this R&O). Prior to this date, such stations are subject to relocation
by licensees in the fixed-satellite service. Such relocation is subject
to the provisions of §§ 101.85 through 101.97. After this date, such
operations are not entitled to protection from fixed-satellite service
operations and must not cause unacceptable interference to
fixed-satellite service station operations. No new licenses will be
granted in these bands after (date of the adoption of the R&O).

\* \* \* \* \*

PART 25\--SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS

116. The authority citation for Part 25 continues to read as follows:

AUTHORITY: 47 U.S.C. 701-744. Interprets or applies sec. 303, 47 U.S.C.
303. 47 U.S.C. sections 154, 301, 302, 303, 307, 309 and 332, unless
otherwise noted.

117. Section 25.115 is amended by adding a new paragraph (e) to read as
     follows:

**§ 25.115 Application for earth station authorizations.**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(e\) *Earth stations operating in the 20/30 GHz Fixed-Satellite Service
with U.S.-licensed or non-U.S. licensed satellites:* Applications to
license individual earth stations operating in the 20/30 GHz band shall
be filed on FCC Form 312, Main Form and Schedule B, and shall also
include the information described in §25.138. Earth stations belonging
to a network operating in the 18.58-18.8 GHz, 19.7-20.2 GHz, 28.35-28.6
GHz or 29.5-30.0 GHz bands may be licensed on a blanket basis.
Applications for such blanket authorization may be filed using FCC Form
312, Main Form and Schedule B, and specifying the number of terminals to
be covered by the blanket license. Each application for a blanket
license under this section shall include the information described in
§25.138.

118. A new section 25.138 is added to read as follows:

**§ 25.138 Blanket Licensing Provisions of GSO FSS Earth Stations in the
18.58-18.8 GHz (space-to-Earth), 19.7--20.2 GHz (space-to-Earth),
28.35-28.6 GHz (Earth-to-space) and 29.5--30.0 GHz (Earth-to-space)
bands.**

\(a\) All applications for a blanket earth station license in the GSO
FSS in the 18.58-18.8 GHz, 19.7--20.2 GHz, 28.35-28.6 GHz and 29.5--30.0
GHz bands that meet the following requirements shall be routinely
processed:

\(1\) GSO FSS earth station antenna off-axis EIRP spectral density for
co-polarized signals shall not exceed the following values, within ±3°
of the GSO arc, under clear sky conditions:

18.5 -- 25log() -- 10log(N) dBW/40kHz for 2.0 7

-2.63 -- 10log(N) dBW/40kHz for 7° 9.23°

21.5 -- 25log() -- 10log(N) dBW/40kHz for 9.23° 48°

-10.5 -- 10log(N) dBW/40kHz for 48° \< 180°

where is the angle in degrees from the axis of the main lobe; for
systems where more than one earth station is expected to transmit
simultaneously in the same bandwidth, e.g., CDMA systems, N is the
likely maximum number of simultaneously transmitting co-frequency earth
stations in the receive beam of the satellite; N=1 for TDMA and FDMA
systems.

\(2\) GSO FSS earth station antenna off-axis EIRP spectral density for
co-polarized signals shall not exceed the following values, for all
directions other than within ±3° of the GSO arc, under clear sky
conditions:

21.5 - 25log() -- 10log(N) dBW/40kHz for 3.5° 7°

0.37 - 10log(N) dBW/40kHz for 7° \< 9.23°

24.5 - 25log() -- 10log(N) dBW/40kHz for 9.23° \< 48°

-7.5 -- 10log(N) dBW/40kHz for 48° \< 180°

where is the angle in degrees from the axis of the main lobe; for
systems where more than one earth station is expected to transmit
simultaneously in the same bandwidth, e.g., CDMA systems, N is the
likely maximum number of simultaneously transmitting co-frequency earth
stations in the receive beam of the satellite; N=1 for TDMA and FDMA
systems.

\(3\) The values given in (1) and (2) above may be exceeded by 3 dB, for
values of \>10°, provided that the total angular range over which this
occurs does not exceed 20 when measured along both sides of the GSO arc.

\(4\) GSO FSS earth station antenna off-axis EIRP spectral density for
cross-polarized signals shall not exceed the following values, in all
directions relative to the GSO arc, under clear sky conditions:

> 8.5 -- 25log() -- 10log(N) dBW/40kHz for 2.0° 7°-12.63 -- 10log(N)
> dBW/40kHz for 7° \< 9.23°

where is the angle in degrees from the axis of the main lobe; for
systems where more than one earth station is expected to transmit
simultaneously in the same bandwidth, e.g., CDMA systems, N is the
likely maximum number of simultaneously transmitting co-frequency earth
stations in the receive beam of the satellite; N=1 for TDMA and FDMA
systems.

\(5\) For earth stations employing uplink power control, the values in
(1), (2), and (4) above may be exceeded by up to 20 dB under conditions
of uplink fading due to precipitation. The amount of such increase in
excess of the actual amount of monitored excess attenuation over clear
sky propagation conditions shall not exceed 1.5 dB or 15 % of the actual
amount of monitored excess attenuation in dB, whichever is larger, with
a confidence level of 90 percent except over transient periods
accounting for no more than 0.5% of the time during which the excess is
no more than 4.0 dB.

\(6\) Power-flux density (PFD) at the Earth\'s surface produced by
emissions from a space station for all conditions, including clear sky,
and for all methods of modulation shall not exceed a level of --118
dBW/m^2^/MHz for the band 19.7-20.2 GHz.

\(b\) Each applicant for earth station license(s) that proposes levels
in excess of those defined in (a) above shall submit link budget
analyses of the operations proposed along with a detailed written
explanation of how each uplink and each transmitted satellite carrier
density figure is derived. Applicants shall also submit a narrative
summary which must indicate whether there are margin shortfalls in any
of the current baseline services as a result of the addition of the
applicant's higher power service, and if so, how the applicant intends
to resolve those margin short falls. Applicants shall certify that all
potentially affected parties (i.e., those GSO FSS satellite networks
that are 2, 4, and 6 degrees apart) acknowledge and do not object to the
use of the applicant\'s higher power densities.

(c) Licensees authorized pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section shall
    bear the burden of coordinating with any future applicants or
    licensees whose proposed compliant operations at 6 degrees or
    smaller orbital spacing, as defined by paragraph (a) of this
    section, is potentially or actually adversely affected by the
    operation of the non-compliant licensee. If no good faith agreement
    can be reached, however, the non-compliant licensee shall reduce its
    earth station and space station power density levels to be compliant
    with those specified in paragraph (a) of this section.

\(d\) The applicant shall provide for each earth station antenna type, a
series of radiation patterns measured on a production antenna performed
on a calibrated antenna range and, as a minimum, shall be made at the
bottom, middle, and top frequencies of the 30 GHz band. The radiation
patterns are:

\(1\) Co-polarized patterns for each of two orthogonal senses of
polarizations in two orthogonal planes of the antenna.

\(i\) In the azimuth plane, plus and minus 10 degrees and plus and minus
180 degrees.

\(ii\) In the elevation plane, zero to 30 degrees.

\(2\) Cross-polarization patterns in the E- and H-planes, plus and minus
10 degrees

\(3\) Main beam gain.

\(e\) Protection of receive earth stations from adjacent satellite
interference is based on either the antenna performance specified in
§25.209 (a) and (b), or the actual receiving earth station antenna
performance, if actual performance provides greater isolation from
adjacent satellite interference. For purposes of insuring the correct
level of protection, the applicant shall provide, for each earth station
antenna type, the antenna performance plots for the 20 GHz band,
including the format specified in subsection (d)(1-3) of this section.

\(f\) The earth station licensee shall not transmit towards a GSO FSS
satellite unless it has prior authorization from the satellite operator
or a space segment vendor authorized by the satellite operator. The
specific transmission shall be conducted in accordance with the
operating protocol specified by the satellite operator.

\(g\) A licensee applying to renew its license must include on FCC Form
405 the number of constructed earth stations.

119. Section 25.145 is amended by adding a new subparagraphs (g)(4) and
     new paragraphs (h) and (i) to read as follows:

**§ 25.145 Licensing conditions for the Fixed-Satellite Service in the
20/30 GHz bands**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(g\) \* \* \* \* \*

\* \* \* \* \*

\* \* \* \* \*

\(4\) Licensees shall submit to the Commission a yearly report
indicating the number of earth stations actually brought into service
under its blanket licensing authority. The annual report is due to the
Commission no later than the first day of April of each year and shall
indicate the deployment figures for the preceding calendar year.

\(h\) Policy governing the relocation of terrestrial services from the
18.58 to 19.3 GHz band:

Frequencies in the 18.58-19.3 GHz band listed in Parts 21, 74, 78, and
101 of this chapter have been reallocated for primary use by the
Fixed-Satellite Service, subject to various provisions for the existing
terrestrial licenses. In accordance with procedures specified in
§§ 101.85 through 101.97 of this chapter, Fixed-Satellite Service
licensees are required to relocate the existing co-primary terrestrial
licensees in these bands if interference to those operations would occur
during the period that the terrestrial stations remain co-primary and
the terrestrial antenna is pointing within 2 degrees of the GSO
satellite. Additionally, Fixed-Satellite Service operations are not
entitled to protection from the co-primary operations until after that
period has expired. (see §§ 21.901(e), 74.502(c), 74.602(g),
78.18(a)(4), and 101.147(r))

\(i\) Protection of fixed services receivers in the 18.3-19.3 GHz band

For purposes of this section, FSS space stations operating in accordance
with the power-flux density limits of § 25.208 are considered not to
cause unacceptable interference to fixed service receivers that are
pointed more than 2 degrees from the FSS space station.

> \(1\) 18.3-18.58 GHz: FSS space stations transmitting in the
> 18.3-18.58 GHz band may not cause unacceptable interference to fixed
> service receive stations that were licensed or for which an
> application was pending prior to (date of adoption of R&O)
>
> \(2\) 18.58-18.8 GHz: FSS space stations transmitting in the
> 18.58-18.8 GHz band may not cause unacceptable interference to fixed
> service receive stations that were licensed or for which an
> application was pending prior to September 18, 1998. After (date 10
> years from adoption of R&O), such fixed station receivers are no
> longer afforded protection from FSS space stations operating in
> accordance with § 25.208 and the fixed station transmitters shall not
> cause harmful interference to the GSO FSS receiving earth stations.
>
> \(3\) 18.8-19.3 GHz: FSS space stations transmitting in the 18.8-19.3
> GHz band may not cause unacceptable interference to fixed service
> receive stations that were licensed or for which an application was
> pending prior to \[adoption date of R&O\]. After (date 10 years from
> adoption of R&O), such fixed station receivers (except those operating
> in 19.26-19.3 GHz) are no longer afforded protection from FSS space
> stations operating in accordance with § 25.208.

120. Section 25.202(a)(1) is amended to read as follows:

**§ 25.202 Frequencies, frequency tolerance and emission limitations**.

(a)(1) Frequency bands. The following frequencies are available for use
by the fixed-satellite service. Precise frequencies and bandwidths of
emission shall be assigned on a case-by-case basis.

\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\--

Earth-to-space

Space-to-Earth (GHz) (GHz)

\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\--

3.7-4.2 ^1^\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...
^1^5.925-6.425

10.95-11.2^1^\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...
^4^13.75-14.0

11.45-11.7^2^\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...
^5^14.0-14.2

11.7-12.2^3^\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\....
14.2-14.5

^9^17.3-17.8

18.3-18.58^1,10^

18.58-18.8^6,10,11^

18.8-19.3^7,10^

19.3-19.7^8,10^\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\....
^1^27.5-29.5

19.7-20.2^10^\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\.....
29.5-30.0

\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\--

^1^ This band is shared coequally with terrestrial radiocommunication
services.

^2^ Use of this band by the fixed-satellite service is limited to
international systems, i.e., other than domestic systems.

^3^ Use of this band by the fixed-satellite service in Region 2 is
limited to national and subregional systems. Fixed-satellite
transponders may be used additionally for transmissions in the
broadcasting-satellite service.

^4^ This band is shared on an equal basis with the Government
radiolocation service, grandfathered space stations in the Tracking and
Data Relay Satellite System, and until January 1, 2000, spaceborne
sensors.

^5^ In this band, stations in the radionavigation service shall operate
on a secondary basis to the fixed-satellite service.

^6^ The band 18.58-18.8 GHz is shared co-equally with existing
terrestrial radiocommunications systems until (a date 10 years after the
release of the R&O)

^7^ The band 18.8-19.3 GHz is shared co-equally with terrestrial
radiocommunications services until \[10 years after adoption date of
R&O\]. After this date, the sub-band 19.26-19.3 GHz is shared co-equally
with existing terrestrial radiocommunications systems.

^8^ The use of the band 19.3-19.7 GHz by the Fixed-Satellite Service
(space-to-Earth) is limited to feeder links for the Mobile-Satellite
Service

^9^ The use of the band 17.3-17.8 GHz by the Fixed-Satellite Service
(Earth-to-space) is limited to feeder links for broadcasting-satellite
service, and the sub-band 17.7-17.8 GHz is shared co-equally with
terrestrial fixed services.

^10^ This band is shared co-equally with the Federal Government
Fixed-Satellite Service.

^11^ The band 18.6-18.8 GHz is shared co-equally with the non-Federal
Government and Federal Government Earth Exploration-Satellite (passive)
and Space Research (passive) Services.

\* \* \* \* \*

121. Section 25.208 is amended by modifying paragraph (c) and adding new
     paragraphs (d), (e) and (f) to read as follows:

**§ 25.208 Power-flux density limits**.

\* \* \* \* \*

\(c\) In the 19.3-19.7 GHz, 22.55-23.00 GHz, 23.00-23.55 GHz, and
24.45-24.75 GHz frequency bands, the power-flux density at the Earth\'s
surface produced by emissions from a space station for all conditions
and for all methods of modulation shall not exceed the following values:

\(1\) -115 dB (W/m^2^) in any 1 MHz band for angles of arrival between 0
and 5 degrees above the horizontal plane.

\(2\) -115+0.5 (d-5) dB (W/m^2^) in any 1 MHz band for angles of arrival
d (in degrees) between 5 and 25 degrees above the horizontal plane.

\(3\) -105 dB (W/m^2^) in any 1 MHz band for angles of arrival between
25 and 90 degrees above the horizontal plane.

\(d\) In the 18.3-18.8 GHz frequency bands, the power-flux density at
the Earth\'s surface produced by emissions from a space station for all
conditions and for all methods of modulation shall not exceed the
following values:

\(1\) -118 dB (W/m^2^) in any 1 MHz band for angles of arrival between 0
and 5 degrees above the horizontal plane.

\(2\) -118+0.65 (d-5) dB (W/m^2^) in any 1 MHz band for angles of
arrival d (in degrees) between 5 and 25 degrees above the horizontal
plane.

\(3\) -105 dB (W/m^2^) in any 1 MHz band for angles of arrival between
25 and 90 degrees above the horizontal plane.

\(e\) In addition to the limits specified in subparagraph (d) of this
section, the power flux-density across the 200 MHz band 18.6-18.8 GHz
produced at the Earth's surface by emissions from a space station under
assumed free-space propagation conditions shall not exceed -95
dB(W/m^2^) for all angles of arrival. This limit may be exceeded by up
to 3 dB for no more than 5% of the time.

\(f\) In the 18.8-19.3 GHz frequency band, the power-flux density at the
Earth\'s surface produced by emissions from a space station for all
conditions and for all methods of modulation shall not exceed the
following values:

-115 - X dB(W/m^2^ ·MHz) for 0° \< 5°

-115 - X + ((10 + X)/20)( - 5)dB(W/m^2^ ·MHz) for 5° \< 25°

-105 dB(W/m^2^ ·MHz) for 25° \< 90°

where is the angle of arrival above the horizontal plane and X is
defined as a function of the number of satellites in the non-GSO FSS
constellation, n, as follows:

for n 50 X = 0 (dB)

for 50 \< n 288 X = (5/119) (n - 50) (dB)

for n \> 288 X = (1/69) (n + 402) (dB)

122. Section 25.251(a) is modified to read as follows:

**§ 25.251 Special requirements for coordination**

\(a\) The administrative aspects of the coordination process are set
forth in §§ 101.103(d) of this chapter in the case of coordination of
terrestrial stations with earth stations and in § 25.203 in the case of
coordination of earth stations with terrestrial stations.

\* \* \* \* \*

**PART 74---EXPERIMENTAL RADIO, AUXILIARY, SPECIAL BROADCAST AND OTHER
PROGRAM DISTRIBUTIONAL SERVICES**

123. The authority citation for Part 74 continues to read as follows:

AUTHORITY: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 307, and 554.

124. Section 74.502(c) is amended to read as follows:

**§ 74.502 Frequency assignment**.

\* \* \* \* \*

\(c\) Aural broadcast STL and intercity relay stations that were
licensed or had applications pending before the Commission as of
September 18, 1998 may continue those operations in the band
18,760-18,820 and 19,100-19,160 MHz on a shared co-primary basis with
other services under Parts 21, 25, and 101 of the Commission\'s rules
until (date 10 years from adoption of this R&O). Prior to this date,
such stations are subject to relocation by licensees in the
fixed-satellite service. Such relocation is subject to the provisions of
§§ 101.85 through 101.97. After this date, such operations are not
entitled to protection from fixed-satellite service operations and must
not cause unacceptable interference to fixed-satellite service station
operations. No new licenses will be granted in these bands after (date
of the adoption of the R&O).

\(1\) 5 MHz maximum authorized bandwidth channels:

\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\--

Receive

Transmit (receive) (MHz) (transmit)

(MHz)

\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\--

340 MHz Separation

\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\--

18762.5\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\....
19102.5

18767.5\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\....
19107.5

18772.5\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\....
19112.5

18777.5\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\....
19117.5

18782.5\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\....
19122.5

18787.5\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\....
19127.5

18792.5\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\....
19132.5

18797.5\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\....
19137.5

18802.5\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\....
19142.5

18807.5\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\....
19147.5

18812.5\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\....
19152.5

18817.5\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\....
19157.5

\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\--

Licensees may use either a two-way link or one frequency of a frequency
pair for a one-way link and shall coordinate proposed operations
pursuant to the procedures required in Sec. 101.103(d).

\* \* \* \* \*

125. Section 74.551 is amended by adding a new paragraph (d) to read as
     follows:

**§ 74.551 Equipment changes**.

\* \* \* \* \*

\(d\) Permissible changes in equipment operating in the bands
18.76-18.82 GHz and 19.1-19.16 GHz:

Notwithstanding other provisions of this section, licensees of stations
that remain co-primary under the provisions of Sec. 74.502(c) may not
make modifications to their systems that increase interference to
satellite earth stations, or result in a facility that would be more
costly to relocate.

126. Section 74.602(g) is amended to read as follows:

**§ Sec. 74.602 Frequency assignment**.

\* \* \* \* \*

\(g\) The following frequencies are available for assignment to
television STL, television relay stations and television translator
relay stations. Stations operating on frequencies in the sub-band
19.26-19.3 GHz that were licensed or had applications pending before the
Commission as of September 18, 1998 may continue those operations on a
shared co-primary basis with other services under Parts 21, 25, 78, and
101 of the Commission\'s rules. Such stations, however, are subject to
relocation by licensees in the fixed-satellite service. Such relocation
is subject to the provisions of §§ 101.85 through 101.97. No new
licenses will be granted in the 19.26-19.3 GHz band after (date of the
adoption of the R&O). The provisions of Section 74.604 do not apply to
the use of these frequencies. Licensees may use either a two-way link or
one or both frequencies of a frequency pair for a one-way link and shall
coordinate proposed operations pursuant to procedures required in Sec.
101.103(d).

\(1\) \* \* \* \* \*

\* \* \* \* \*

127. Section 74.638(b) is amended to read as follows:

**§ 74.638 Frequency coordination**.

\* \* \* \* \*

\(b\) Coordination of assignments in the 6425-6525 MHz and 17.7-19.7 GHz
bands will be in accordance with the procedure established in Sec.
101.103(d) except that the prior coordination process for mobile
(temporary fixed) assignments may be completed orally and the period

allowed for response to a coordination notification may be less than 30
days if the parties agree.

128. Section 74.651 is amended by adding a new paragraph (e) to read as
     follows:

**§ 74.651 Equipment changes**.

\* \* \* \* \*

\(e\) Permissible changes in equipment operating in the band 19.26-19.3
GHz:

Notwithstanding other provisions of this section, licensees of stations
that remain co-primary under the provisions of Sec. 74.602(g) may not
make modifications to their systems that increase interference to
satellite earth stations, or result in a facility that would be more
costly to relocate.

**PART 78---CABLE TELEVISION RELAY SERVICE**

129. The authority citation for Part 78 continues to read as follows:

AUTHORITY: Secs. 2, 3, 4, 301, 303, 307, 308, 309, 48 Stat., as amended,
1064, 1065, 1066, 1081, 1082, 1083, 1084, 1085; 47 U.S.C. 152, 153, 154,
301, 303, 307, 308, 309.

130. Section 78.18(a)(4) is amended to read as follows:

**§ 78.18 Frequency assignments**.

\(a\) \* \* \* \* \*

\* \* \* \* \*

\(4\) The Cable Television Relay Service is also assigned the following
frequencies in the 17,700-19,700 MHz band. These frequencies are
co-equally shared with stations in other services under Parts 25, 74,
and 101 of the Commission\'s rules. Cable Television Relay Service
stations operating on frequencies in the sub-band 19.26-19.3 GHz that
were licensed or had applications pending before the Commission as of
September 18, 1998 may continue those operations on a shared co-primary
basis with other services under Parts 25, 74, and 101 of the
Commission\'s rules. Such stations, however, are subject to relocation
by licensees in the fixed-satellite service. Such relocation is subject
to the provisions of §§ 101.85 through 101.97. No new Part 78 licenses
will be granted in the 19.26-19.3 GHz band after (date of the adoption
of the R&O). Licensees may use either a two-way link or one or both
frequencies of a frequency pair for a one-way link and shall coordinate
proposed operations pursuant to procedures required in Sec. 101.103(d).
These bands may be used for analog or digital modulation.

\(i\) \* \* \* \* \*

\* \* \* \* \*

131. Section 78.36(b) is amended to read as follows:

**§ 78.36 Frequency coordination**.

\* \* \* \* \*

\(b\) 6425-6525 MHz and 17.7-19.7 GHz. Coordination of fixed and mobile
assignments will be in accordance with the procedure established in Sec.
101.103(d), except that the prior coordination process for mobile
(temporary fixed) assignments may be completed orally and the period
allowed for response to a coordination notification may be less than 30
days if the parties agree.

132. Section 78.109 is amended by adding a new paragraph (d) to read as
     follows:

**§ 78.109 Equipment changes**.

\* \* \* \* \*

\(d\) Permissible changes in equipment operating in the band 19.26-19.3
GHz:

Notwithstanding other provisions of this section, licensees of stations
that remain co-primary under the provisions of Sec. 78.18(a)(4) may not
make modifications to their systems that increase interference to
satellite earth stations, or result in a facility that would be more
costly to relocate.

**PART 101---FIXED MICROWAVE SERVICES**

133. The authority citation for Part 101 continues to read as follows:

AUTHORITY: 47 U.S.C. 154, and 303.

134. Section 101.57 is amended by adding a new paragraph (f) to read as
     follows:

**§ 101.57 Modification of station license**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(f\) Permissible changes in equipment operating in the band 18.58-19.3
GHz:

Notwithstanding other provisions of this section, stations that remain
co-primary under the provisions of Sec. 101.147(r) may not make
modifications to their systems that increase interference to satellite
earth stations, or result in a facility that would be more costly to
relocate.

135. A new heading is added immediately following section 101.81 to read
     as follows:

POLICIES GOVERNING FIXED SERVICE RELOCATION FROM THE 18.58-19.30 GHZ
BAND

136. A new section 101.85 is added to read as follows:

**§ 101.85 Transition of the 18.58-19.3 GHz band from the terrestrial
fixed services to the fixed-satellite service (FSS)**

Fixed services (FS) frequencies in the 18.58-19.3 GHz bands listed in
Secs. 21.901(e), 74.502(c), 74.602(g), 78.18(a)(4), and 101.147(a) and
(r) have been allocated for use by the fixed-satellite service (FSS).
The rules in this section provide for a transition period during which
FSS licensees may relocate existing FS licensees using these frequencies
to other microwave bands.

\(a\) FSS licensees may negotiate with FS licensees authorized to use
frequencies in the 18.58-19.30 band for the purpose of agreeing to terms
under which the FS licensees would:

\(1\) Relocate their operations to other fixed microwave bands or other
media; or alternatively,

\(2\) Accept a sharing arrangement with the FSS licensee that may result
in an otherwise impermissible level of interference to the FSS
operations.

(b) FS operations in the 18.58-19.30 GHz band that remain co-primary
    under the provisions of §§ 21.901(e), 74.502(c), 74.602(d),
    78.18(a)(4), and 101.147(r) will continue to be co-primary with the
    FSS users of this spectrum until (10 years after date of adoption of
    R&O) or until the relocation of the fixed service operations,
    whichever occurs sooner. After this date, only FS operations in the
    band 19.26-19.3 GHz will continue to be co-primary with the FSS
    users. Notwithstanding this continued co-primary status, FS users in
    the 19.26-19.3 GHz band remain subject to the relocation procedures
    of §§ 101.85-101.95. If no agreement is reached during the
    negotiations, an FSS licensee may initiate relocation procedures.
    Under the relocation procedures, the incumbent is required to
    relocate, provided that the FSS licensee meets the conditions of
    Sec. 101.91.

(c) Negotiation periods are defined as follows:

\(1\) Non-public safety incumbents will have a two-year negotiation
period.

\(2\) Public safety incumbents will have a three-year negotiation
period.

137. A new section 101.89 is added to read as follows:

**§ 101.89 Negotiations**.

\(a\) The negotiation is triggered by the fixed-satellite service (FSS)
licensee, who must contact the fixed services (FS) licensee and request
that negotiations begin.

\(b\) Once negotiations have begun, an FS licensee may not refuse to
negotiate and all parties are required to negotiate in good faith. Good
faith requires each party to provide information to the other that is
reasonably necessary to facilitate the relocation process. In evaluating
claims that a party has not negotiated in good faith, the FCC will
consider, inter alia, the following factors:

\(1\) Whether the FSS licensee has made a bona fide offer to relocate
the FS licensee to comparable facilities in accordance with Section
101.91(b);

\(2\) If the FS licensee has demanded a premium, the type of premium
requested (e.g., whether the premium is directly related to relocation,
such as system-wide relocations and analog-to-digital conversions,
versus other types of premiums), and whether the value of the premium as
compared to the cost of providing comparable facilities is
disproportionate (i.e., whether there is a lack of proportion or
relation between the two);

\(3\) What steps the parties have taken to determine the actual cost of
relocation to comparable facilities;

\(4\) Whether either party has withheld information requested by the
other party that is necessary to estimate relocation costs or to
facilitate the relocation process.

\(c\) Any party alleging a violation of our good faith requirement must
attach an independent estimate of the relocation costs in question to
any documentation filed with the Commission in support of its claim. An
independent cost estimate must include a specification for the
comparable facility and a statement of the costs associated with
providing that facility to the incumbent licensee.

\(d\) Negotiations will commence when the FSS licensee informs the FS
licensee in writing of its desire to negotiate. Negotiations will be
conducted with the goal of providing the FS licensee with comparable
facilities, defined as facilities possessing the following
characteristics:

\(1\) *Throughput.* Communications throughput is the amount of
information transferred within a system in a given amount of time. If
analog facilities are being replaced with analog, the FSS licensee is
required to provide the FS licensee with an equivalent number of 4 kHz
voice channels. If digital facilities are being replaced with digital,
the FSS licensee must provide the FS licensee with equivalent data
loading bits per second (bps). FSS licensees must provide FS licensees
with enough throughput to satisfy the FS licensee\'s system use at the
time of relocation, not match the total capacity of the FS system.

\(2\) *Reliability*. System reliability is the degree to which
information is transferred accurately within a system. FSS licensees
must provide FS licensees with reliability equal to the overall
reliability of their system. For digital data systems, reliability is
measured by the percent of time the bit error rate (BER) exceeds a
desired value, and for analog or digital voice transmissions, it is
measured by the percent of time that audio signal quality meets an
established threshold. If an analog voice system is replaced with a
digital voice system, only the resulting frequency response, harmonic
distortion, signal-to-noise ratio and its reliability will be considered
in determining comparable reliability.

\(3\) *Operating costs*. Operating costs are the cost to operate and
maintain the FS system. FSS licensees must compensate FS licensees for
any increased recurring costs associated with the replacement facilities
(e.g., additional rental payments, increased utility fees) for five
years after relocation. FSS licensees may satisfy this obligation by
making a lump-sum payment based on present value using current interest
rates. Additionally, the maintenance costs to the FS licensee must be
equivalent to the 18 GHz system in order for the replacement system to
be considered comparable.

138. A new section 101.91 is added to read as follows:

**§ 101.91 Involuntary relocation procedures**.

\(a\) If no agreement is reached during the negotiations period, an FSS
licensee may initiate relocation procedures under the Commission\'s
rules. FSS licensees are obligated to pay to relocate only the specific
microwave links from which their systems may receive interference. Under
these procedures, the FS licensee is required to relocate, provided that
the FSS licensee:

\(1\) Guarantees payment of relocation costs, including all engineering,
equipment, site and FCC fees, as well as any legitimate and prudent
transaction expenses incurred by the FS licensee 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. FSS licensees are not required to pay FS licensees
for internal resources devoted to the relocation process. FSS licensees
are not required to pay for transaction costs incurred by FS licensees
during the negotiations once the negotiation is initiated, or for fees
that cannot be legitimately tied to the provision of comparable
facilities;

\(2\) 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 frequencies and
frequency coordination; and

\(3\) Builds the replacement system and tests it for comparability with
the existing 18 GHz system.

\(b\) Comparable facilities. The replacement system provided to an
incumbent during a relocation must be at least equivalent to the
existing FS system with respect to the following three factors:

\(1\) *Throughput*. Communications throughput is the amount of
information transferred within a system in a given amount of time. If
analog facilities are being replaced with analog, the FSS licensee is
required to provide the FS licensee with an equivalent number of 4 kHz
voice channels. If digital facilities are being replaced with digital,
the FSS licensee must provide the FS licensee with equivalent data
loading bits per second (bps). FSS licensees must provide FS licensees
with enough throughput to satisfy the FS licensee\'s system use at the
time of relocation, not match the total capacity of the FS system.

\(2\) *Reliability*. System reliability is the degree to which
information is transferred accurately within a system. FSS licensees
must provide FS licensees with reliability equal to the overall
reliability of their system. For digital data systems, reliability is
measured by the percent of time the bit error rate (BER) exceeds a
desired value, and for analog or digital voice transmissions, it is
measured by the percent of time that audio signal quality meets an
established threshold. If an analog voice system is replaced with a
digital voice system, only the resulting frequency response, harmonic
distortion, signal-to-noise ratio and its reliability will be considered
in determining comparable reliability.

\(3\) *Operating costs*. Operating costs are the cost to operate and
maintain the FS system. FSS licensees must compensate FS licensees for
any increased recurring costs associated with the replacement facilities
(e.g., additional rental payments, increased utility fees) for five
years after relocation. FSS licensees may satisfy this obligation by
making a lump-sum payment based on present value using current interest
rates. Additionally, the maintenance costs to the FS licensee must be
equivalent to the 18 GHz system in order for the replacement system to
be considered comparable.

\(c\) The FS 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.

\(d\) If the FS licensee demonstrates to the Commission that the new
facilities are not comparable to the former facilities, the Commission
may require the FSS licensee to further modify or replace the FS
licensee's equipment.

139. A new section 101.95 is added to read as follows:

**§ 101.95 Sunset provisions for licensees in the 18.58-19.26 GHz
band**.

\(a\) FSS licensees are not required to pay relocation costs after the
relocation rules sunset (see §§ 74.502(c), 74.602(g), 78.18(a)(4), and
101.147(a) and (r)). Once the relocation rules sunset, an FSS licensee
may require the incumbent to cease operations, provided that the FSS
licensee intends to turn on a system within interference range of the
incumbent, as determined by TIA Bulletin 10-F or any standard successor.
FSS licensee notification to the affected FS 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 FS
licensee must turn its license back into the Commission, unless the
parties have entered into an agreement which allows the FS licensee to
continue to operate on a mutually agreed upon basis.

\(b\) If the parties cannot agree on a schedule or an alternative
arrangement, requests for extension will be accepted and reviewed on a
case-by-case basis. The Commission will grant such extensions only if
the incumbent can demonstrate that:

\(1\) It cannot relocate within the six-month period (e.g., because no
alternative spectrum or other reasonable option is available), and;

\(2\) The public interest would be harmed if the incumbent is forced to
terminate operations (e.g., if public safety communications services
would be disrupted).

140. A new section 101.97 is added to read as follows:

**§ 101.97 Future licensing in the 18.58-19.30 MHz band**.

After (date of adoption of the R&O), all major modifications and
extensions to existing FS systems in the 18.58-19.30 band (with the
exception of certain low power operations authorized under Sec.
101.147(r)(10)) will be authorized on a secondary basis to FSS systems.
All other modifications will render the modified FS license secondary to
FSS operations, unless the incumbent affirmatively justifies primary
status and the incumbent FS licensee establishes that the modification
would not add to the relocation costs for FSS licensees. Incumbent FS
licensees will maintain primary status for the following technical
changes:

\(a\) Decreases in power;

\(b\) Minor changes (increases or decreases) in antenna height;

\(c\) Minor location changes (up to two seconds);

\(d\) Any data correction which does not involve a change in the
location of an existing facility;

\(e\) Reductions in authorized bandwidth;

\(f\) Minor changes (increases or decreases) in structure height;

\(g\) Changes (increases or decreases) in ground elevation that do not
affect centerline height;

\(h\) Minor equipment changes.

The provisions of § 101.57 are applicable, notwithstanding any other
provisions of this section.

141. Section 101.101 is amended to read as follows:

**§ 101.101 Frequency availability**

+------------------+---------+--------+---------+-----------+---------+
| Frequency band   | Radio   |        |         |           |         |
| (MHz)            | Service |        |         |           |         |
+------------------+---------+--------+---------+-----------+---------+
|                  | Common  | P      | Br      | Other     | Notes   |
|                  | carrier | rivate | oadcast | (Parts    |         |
|                  | (Part   | radio  | au      | 15, 21,   |         |
|                  | 101)    | (Part  | xiliary | 24, 25,   |         |
|                  |         | 101)   | (Part   | 74, 78,   |         |
|                  |         |        | 74)     | 100)      |         |
+------------------+---------+--------+---------+-----------+---------+
| \* \*\* \* \*    | LTTS    | OFS    | TV BAS  | SAT       |         |
|                  |         |        |         |           |         |
| 14,200 -- 14,400 | CC      | OFS    | TV BAS  | SAT CARS  |         |
|                  |         |        |         |           |         |
| 17,700 -- 18,580 | CC      |        |         | CARS SAT  |         |
|                  |         |        |         |           |         |
| 19,300 -- 19,700 |         |        |         |           |         |
|                  |         |        |         |           |         |
| \* \* \* \* \*   |         |        |         |           |         |
+------------------+---------+--------+---------+-----------+---------+

\* \* \* \* \*

142. Section 101.147(a) is amended to read as follows:

**§ 101.147 Frequency assignments**

\(a\) Frequencies in the following bands are available for assignment
for fixed microwave services.

\* \* \* \* \*

14,200-14,400 MHz (24)

17,700-18,300 MHz (10) (15)

18,300-18,580 MHz (5) (10) (15)

19,300-19,700 MHz (5) (10) (15)

21,200-22,000 MHz (4) (11) (12) (13) (24) (25) (26)

\* \* \* \* \*

Notes

\* \* \* \* \*

143. Section 101.147(r) is amended to read as follows:

**§ 101.147 Frequency assignments**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(r\) *17,700 to 19,700 and 24,250 to 25,250 MHz*: Stations operating on
the following frequencies in the band 18.58-18.8 GHz that were licensed
or had applications pending before the Commission as of (date of
adoption of this R&O) may continue those operations on a shared
co-primary basis with other services under Parts 21, 25, and 74 of the
Commission\'s rules until (date 10 years from adoption of this R&O).
Those stations operating on the following frequencies in the band
18.8-19.3 GHz that were licensed or had applications pending before the
Commission as of September 18, 1998 may continue those operations on a
shared co-primary basis with other services under Parts 21, 25, and 74
of the Commission\'s rules until (date 10 years from adoption of this
R&O). After this date, operations in the 18.58-19.26 GHz band are not
entitled to protection from fixed-satellite service operations and must
not cause unacceptable interference to fixed-satellite service station
operations. No new Part 101 licenses will be granted in the 18.58-19.3
GHz band after (date of the adoption of the R&O), except for certain low
power operations authorized under Sec. 101.147(r)(10), which may
continue to operate on a co-primary basis. Licensees may use either a
two-way link or one frequency of a frequency pair for a one-way link and
must coordinate proposed operations pursuant to the procedures required
in Sec. 101.103. (Note, however, that stations authorized as of
September 9, 1983, to use frequencies in the band 17.7-19.7 GHz may,
upon proper application, continue to be authorized for such operations,
consistent with the above conditions related to the 18.58-19.3 GHz band)

\* \* \* \* \*

144. Section 101.147(r)(10) is amended by adding a new subsection (iv)
     to read as follows:

**§ 101.147 Frequency assignments**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(r\) (10) \* \* \* \*\*

\* \* \* \* \*

\(iv\) Low power stations authorized in the band 18.8-19.3 GHz after
June 8, 2000 are restricted to indoor use only.

**APPENDIX B**

**Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis**

As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)[^222], an Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant
economic impact on small entities was incorporated in the *18 GHz
NPRM.*[^223] The Commission sought written public comments on the
proposals in the *NPRM* including comment on the IRFA. This present
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) conforms to the RFA.[^224]

A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Rules

In this *Report and Order*, the Commission provides a band plan that
should go a long way in facilitating the deployment of new services by
designating different dedicated sub-bands for ubiquitously deployed FSS
earth stations and near-ubiquitous terrestrial fixed services in the 18
GHz band. Additionally, this plan will, through the judicious choice of
band segments subject to co-primary sharing, significantly lower any
consequential administrative costs of coordination.

**B. Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response
to the IRFA.**

No comments were submitted in direct response to the IRFA. However
VisionStar made a specific proposal for the treatment of FSS licensees
that are small businesses (see ¶ 55 of this *Report and Order*) and
several commenters provided licensee data for sub-bands of the spectrum
concerned, incorporated below for the specific services involved. We
were unable to act on VisionStar's proposal for the provision of an
"Early Service" for FSS licensees that are small businesses, because we
do not collect annual revenue information from space station or earth
station licensees, which would be necessary to determine if they are
small businesses (see C below) and because of the potential interference
impact of such "temporary secondary " operations on other FSS licensees,
as discussed in the Secondary Use section of this *Report and Order.*

**C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities To Which
the Rules Will Apply**

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 adopted rules.[^225] The RFA generally defines the term
\"small entity \" as having the same meaning as the terms \"small
business,\" \"small organization,\" and \"small governmental
jurisdiction.\"[^226] In addition, the term \"small business\" has the
same meaning as the term \"small business concern\" under the Small
Business Act.[^227] A small business concern is one which: (1) is
independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of
operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the
Small Business Administration (SBA).[^228] A small organization is
generally \"any not-for- profit enterprise which is independently owned
and operated and is not dominant in its field."[^229] Nationwide, as of
1992, there were approximately 275,801 small organizations.[^230]
\"Small governmental jurisdiction\" generally means \"governments of
cities, counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or
special districts, with a population of less than 50,000.\"[^231] As of
1992, there were approximately 85,006 such jurisdictions in the United
States.[^232] This number includes 38,978 counties, cities, and towns;
of these, 37,566, or 96 percent, have populations of fewer than
50,000.[^233] The Census Bureau estimates that this ratio is
approximately accurate for all governmental entities. Thus, of the
85,006 governmental entities, we estimate that 81,600 (91 percent) are
small entities. Below, we further describe and estimate the number of
small entity licensees that may be affected by the adopted rules.

[1. Cable Services]{.underline}. The SBA has developed a definition of
small entities for cable and other pay television services, which
includes all such companies generating \$11 million or less in revenue
annually. This definition includes cable systems operators, closed
circuit television services, direct broadcast satellite services,
multipoint distribution systems, satellite master antenna systems and
subscription television services. According to the Census Bureau, there
were 1,788 total cable and other pay television services and 1,423 had
less than \$11 million in revenue. The Commission has developed its own
definition of a small cable system operator for the purposes of rate
regulation. Under the Commission\'s Rules, a \"small cable company,\" is
one serving fewer than 400,000 subscribers nationwide. Based on our most
recent information, we estimate that there were 1,439 cable operators
that qualified as small cable system operators at the end of 1995. Since
then, some of those companies may have grown to serve over 400,000
subscribers, and others may have been involved in transactions that
caused them to be combined with other cable operators. Consequently, we
estimate that there are fewer than 1,439 small entity cable system
operators.

The Communications Act also contains a definition of a small cable
system operator, which is \"a cable operator that, directly or through
an affiliate, serves in the aggregate fewer than 1 percent of all
subscribers in the United States and is not affiliated with any entity
or entities whose gross annual revenues in the aggregate exceed
\$250,000,000.\" The Commission has determined that there are 61,700,000
subscribers in the United States. Therefore, we found that an operator
serving fewer than 617,000 subscribers shall be deemed a small operator,
if its annual revenues, when combined with the total annual revenues of
all of its affiliates, do not exceed \$250 million in the aggregate.
Based on available data, we find that the number of cable operators
serving 617,000 subscribers or less totals 1,450. We do not request nor
do we collect information concerning whether cable system operators are
affiliated with entities whose gross annual revenues exceed
\$250,000,000, and thus are unable at this time to estimate with greater
precision the number of cable system operators that would qualify as
small cable operators under the definition in the Communications Act.

International Services

The Commission has not developed a definition of small entities
applicable to licensees in the international services. Therefore, the
applicable definition of small entity is generally the definition under
the SBA rules applicable to Communications Services, Not Elsewhere
Classified (NEC).[^234] This definition provides that a small entity is
expressed as one with \$11.0 million or less in annual receipts.[^235]
According to the Census Bureau, there were a total of 848 communications
services providers, NEC, in operation in 1992, and a total of 775 had
annual receipts of less than \$9.999 million.[^236] The Census report
does not provide more precise data.

[2. Fixed Satellite Transmit/Receive Earth Stations]{.underline}.
Currently there are no operational fixed satellite transmit/receive
earth stations authorized for use in the 17.7-20.2 GHz and 27.5-30 GHz
band. However, with 12 GSO/FSS licensees and 1 NGSO/FSS licensee, and
our decision to adopt blanket licensing, we expect applications for FSS
earth station licenses to be filed in the near future. We do not request
or collect annual revenue information, and thus are unable to estimate
the number of earth stations that would constitute a small business
under the SBA definition.

[3. Mobile Satellite Earth Station Feeder Links.]{.underline} We have
granted one license for MSS earth station feeder links. We do not
request or collect annual revenue information, and thus are unable to
estimate of the number of mobile satellite earth stations that would
constitute a small business under the SBA definition.

[4. Space Stations (Geostationary).]{.underline} Commission records
reveal that there are 12 space station licensees. We do not request nor
collect annual revenue information, and thus are unable to estimate of
the number of geostationary space stations that would constitute a small
business under the SBA definition, or apply any rules providing special
consideration for Space Station (Geostationary) licensees that are small
businesses.

[5. Space Stations (Non‑Geostationary)]{.underline}. There is one
Non‑Geostationary Space Station licensee and that licensee is
operational. We do not request nor collect annual revenue information,
and thus are unable to estimate of the number of non‑geostationary space
stations that would constitute a small business under the SBA
definition.

[6. Direct Broadcast Satellites.]{.underline} Because DBS provides
subscription services, DBS falls within the SBA definition of Cable and
Other Pay Television Services (SIC 4841). This definition provides that
a small entity is expressed as one with \$11.0 million or less in annual
receipts. As of December 1996, there were eight DBS licensees. However,
the Commission does not collect annual revenue data for DBS and,
therefore, is unable to ascertain the number of small DBS licensees that
could be impacted by these proposed rules. Although DBS service requires
a great investment of capital for operation, we acknowledge that there
are several new entrants in this field that may not yet have generated
more than \$11 million in annual receipts, and therefore may be
categorized as a small business, if independently owned and operated.

[7. Auxiliary, Special Broadcast and other program distribution
services.]{.underline} This service 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 back to the station). At the
frequencies under consideration in this proceeding there are no
transmissions of this type directly to the public. The Commission has
not developed a definition of small entities applicable to broadcast
auxiliary licensees. Therefore, the applicable definition of small
entity is the definition under the Small Business Administration (SBA)
rules applicable to radio broadcasting stations (SIC 4832) and
television broadcasting stations (SIC 4833). These definitions provide,
respectively, that a small entity is one with either \$5.0 million or
less in annual receipts or \$10.5 million in annual receipts. 13 C.F.R.
§ 121.201, SIC CODES 4832 and 4833. The numbers of these stations are
very small. The FCC does not collect financial information on any
broadcast facility and the Department of Commerce does not collect
financial information on these auxiliary broadcast facilities. We
believe, however, that most, if not all, of these auxiliary facilities
could be classified as small businesses by themselves. We also recognize
that most of these types of services are owned by a parent station
which, in some cases, would be covered by the revenue definition of
small business entity discussed above. These stations would likely have
annual revenues that exceed the SBA maximum to be designated as a small
business (as noted, either \$5 million for a radio station or \$10.5
million for a TV station). Furthermore, they do not meet the Small
Business Act\'s definition of a \"small business concern\" because they
are not independently owned and operated.

[8. Microwave Services.]{.underline} Microwave services includes common
carrier, private operational fixed, and broadcast auxiliary radio
services. At present, there are 22,015 common carrier licensees,
approximately 61,670 private operational fixed licensees and broadcast
auxiliary radio licensees in the microwave services. Inasmuch as the
Commission has not yet defined a small business with respect to
microwave services, we will utilize the SBA\'s definition applicable to
radiotelephone companies ‑‑ i.e., an entity with no more than 1,500
persons. 13 C.F.R. § 121.201, SIC CODE 4812. We estimate, for this
purpose, that all of the Fixed Microwave licensees (excluding broadcast
auxiliary licensees) would qualify as small entities under the SBA
definition for radiotelephone companies.

**D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements**

The Commission\'s existing rules in Part 25 on FSS operations contain
reporting requirements for FSS systems, and we modify these reporting
requirements to eliminate duplicative costs of filing multiple
applications. In addition, we add an annual reporting requirement to
indicate the number of satellite earth stations actually brought into
service. The proposed blanket licensing procedures do not affect small
entities disproportionately and it is likely no additional outside
professional skills are required to complete the annual report
indicating the number of small antenna earth stations actually brought
into service.

**E. Steps Taken to Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered**

*The 18 GHz NPRM* solicited comment on several alternatives for spectrum
sharing, blanket licensing, and band segmentation. This *Report and
Order* considered comments offering alternatives, and has acted in
response to stated concerns and suggestions, particularly those
representing significant agreement or consensus by commenters. The
decisions of this *Report and Order* should positively impact both large
and small businesses by providing a faster, more efficient, and less
economically burdensome coordination and licensing procedure, as well as
providing an alternative band plan that better meets these concerns. The
blanket licensing service rules provide for consolidation of licensing
for small antenna earth stations and a new balanced requirement designed
to ensure that new satellite services will not cause interference to
existing terrestrial services. These rules substitute a single
requirement to annually l report the number of satellite earth stations
brought into service in the last year, compared to the current
requirement for individual licensing of such stations. This change,
discussed further above, should minimize the impact on Small entities.

**F. Report to Congress**

The Commission will send a copy of this *Report and Orde*r including
this FRFA, in a report to be sent to Congress pursuant to the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1966, s*ee* 5 U.S.C. §
801 (a)(1)(A). In addition, the Commission will send a copy of the
Report and Order, including this FRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy
of the Small Business Administration. A copy of this *Report and Order*
and FRFA (or summaries thereof) will also be published in the Federal
Register. *See* 5 U.S.C. § 604(b).

**Appendix C**

List of Comments

IB Doc. 98-172, RM-9005, RM-9118

# **ABC, Inc.**  {#abc-inc. .unnumbered}

AESCO Systems, Inc.

Airtouch Communications, Inc.

American Petroleum Institute

Association of American Railroads

Association for Maximum Service Television, Inc.

Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials-International,
Inc.

AT&T Wireless Services, Inc.

BellSouth Corporation

Boeing Company

BP Communications of Alaska, Inc.

Capitol Broadcasting Co., Inc.

Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association

Comsearch

County of Los Angeles

DirecTV Enterprises, Inc.

Fixed Wireless Communications Coalition

GE American Communications, Inc. (GE Americom)

GTE Service Corporation

Hughes Electronics, Inc.

Independent Cable & Telecommunications Association

Iridium LLC

KaStar Satellite Communications Corporation

Lockheed Martin Corporation

Loral Space & Communications Ltd.

Motorola, Inc.

PanAmSat Corporation

Pegasus Development Corporation

RCN Telecom Services, Inc.

SBC Communications, Inc.

SkyBridge LLC

State of California

Taridan Microwave Networks

Teligent, Inc.

Teledesic LLC

Telecommunications Industry Association (FPTP)

Telecommunications Industry Association (SOUS)

TRW, Inc.

UTC

WinStar Communications, Inc.

Wireless Communications Association International, Inc.

VisionStar, Inc.

## List of Reply Comments {#list-of-reply-comments .unnumbered}

IB Docket No. 98-172

# **Airtouch Communications, Inc.** {#airtouch-communications-inc. .unnumbered}

American Petroleum Institute

Association of American Railroads

APCO

BellSouth Corporation

BP Communications Alaska, Inc.

Celsat America, Inc.

County of Los Angeles

City of Long Beach

DirecTV Enterprises, Inc.

Fixed Wireless Communications Coalition

GE American Communications, Inc. (GE Americom)

Hughes Electronics, Inc.

Independent Cable & Telecommunications Association

KaStar Satellite Communications Corp.

Lockheed Martin Corporation

Loral Space and Communications, Ltd.

Motorola, Inc. and Iridium LLC

PanAmSat Corporation

Pegasus Development Corporation

RCN Telecom Services, Inc.

SBC Communications, Inc.

SkyBridge LLC

Teledesic LLC

Teligent, Inc.

Watson Communications Systems, Inc.

WinStar Communications, Inc.

**SEPARATE STATEMENT OF\
COMMISSIONER HAROLD FURCHTGOTT-ROTH,\
Approving in Part, Dissenting in Part**

Re: *Redesignation of the 17.7-19.7 GHz Frequency Band, Blanket
Licensing of Satellite Earth Stations in the 17.7-20.2 GHz and 27.5-30.0
Frequency Bands, et al.* IB Docket No. 98-172, RM-9005, RM-9118.

I support much of today's item. The International Bureau has done a good
job of balancing the interests of terrestrial and satellite service
providers in developing today's Order.[^237] These are complex and
difficult issues, and the Bureau should be applauded for its hard work
in bringing this item to closure.

I do fear, however, that this decision represents a lost opportunity to
further improve our Emerging Technologies relocation policy[^238] prior
to the application of these bands.[^239]

There appears to be some sense that the Emerging Technologies'
relocation policy worked well for PCS. Therefore, the argument goes, we
should apply this successful policy in other bands as well.

Although I believe there were some under-publicized bumps in that PCS
road,[^240] it may well be true that the Emerging Technologies
relocation policy "worked" for those bands. A number of factors,
however, may have obscured the actual efficiency of the Commission's
Emerging Technologies relocation policy. First, PCS providers were about
to enter into an almost certainly lucrative marketplace. Second, PCS
could offer regional or even local service, therefore permitting only
partial band clearing before revenues could flow. Third, PCS could
viably use only a portion of its spectrum in the initial stages of
deployment, thus sidestepping intransigent incumbents. These factors
created more flexibility for PCS to make the rules "work" -- regardless
of whether or not they optimized efficient relocation.

In my view, however, "working" is not enough. We need to get the right
answer on relocation policy.

**Why is relocation policy so significant?**

Current FCC relocation policy implicitly sets the entry price for new
providers. Just as a business plan must incorporate an auction price,
the plan must also consider the costs of incumbent relocation.[^241]
This is particularly true in the satellite context. Unlike PCS,
satellite providers must consider the national -- or even international
-- costs of relocation before they can make a rational assessment of the
viability of their business plans. Furthermore, unlike PCS, satellite
providers must evaluate relocation costs as a condition precedent to
providing any revenue-producing service.[^242] Thus, with a national
scope and the lack of early revenue to offset subsequent relocation
costs, satellite service providers face particularly high stakes in the
relocation debate.

The consequences of crafting a faulty relocation policy are enormous. If
the FCC sets relocation costs too high, artificially high entry costs
may prevent the offering of economically efficient services.
Alternatively, if relocation costs are set too low, the Commission may
essentially be funding new entrants on the backs of terrestrial
incumbents.

These factors legitimately prompted the Commission to take a
particularly close look at relocation policy in this specific
proceeding. Apart from the case-specific facts in this Order, however,
the FCC must develop a generally applicable relocation policy that
facilitates efficient relocation transactions in all spectrum bands and
for all types of business models. The agency should not be lured into
making different policies for different services based on the different
business models.

**The Emerging Technologies Precedent**

Our current relocation rules for emerging technologies are codified in
Part 101.[^243] Those rules establish three "periods" for the relocation
process: voluntary negotiation, mandatory negotiation, and involuntary
relocation.[^244] Public safety incumbents are entitled to a three-year
voluntary period, followed by a two-year mandatory period. Non-public
safety licensees are subject to a one-year voluntary period followed by
a one-year mandatory period. Parties are required to engage in "good
faith" negotiations only during the mandatory negotiation period.[^245]
If the parties fail to reach agreement by the end of the voluntary and
mandatory negotiation periods, the new entrant may force incumbent
licensees into involuntary relocation.

Under involuntary relocation, incumbents are entitled to a new system
that is "comparable" to the old one.[^246] The "replacement system" must
be "at least equivalent to the existing system" with respect to three
variables: throughput, reliability, and operating costs. Involuntary
relocation disputes are to be resolved through a Commission proceeding.

Not a single transaction has ever made it to the involuntary relocation
phase; thus, the Commission has never been called upon to spell out
exactly what is required under our "comparability" standard.[^247]

**Common Goals**

The fundamental basis of any relocation policy is that incumbent
relocation and prompt entry by new service providers best serve both the
public interest and efficient spectrum management.[^248] This public
interest assessment is not unlike the use of eminent domain powers by
government entities to make room for a new highway or civic
building.[^249] Here the Commission has determined that the new services
in a specific band of spectrum (like the highway or the civic building)
are more valuable to the public than the old services (like the prior
uses of the land). In implementing this policy, there is very little
debate about the Commission's goals. The terrestrial incumbents must be
relocated and made whole as promptly and efficiently as possible.[^250]

However, our current rules and procedures simply do not lend a
sufficient degree of clarity to the negotiating parties. Clear
expectations reduce transaction costs and would expedite incumbent
relocation.[^251] Below, I describe some possible improvements to our
relocation policy.

**A Streamlined Procedure**

I support today's decision to eliminate the voluntary negotiation period
and shorten the negotiation period for public safety licensees.
Eliminating the voluntary negotiation period requires the parties
immediately to begin negotiations to resolve these relocation issues. In
addition, the "comparability" criteria, formerly relegated to the
involuntary relocation period, are now applicable to the mandatory
negotiation period.[^252] These comparability criteria should assist the
negotiating parties in reaching agreements sooner.[^253] Today's order
also eliminates the burdensome requirement that incumbents have one year
to assess the comparability of their new and relocated equipment. Now an
incumbent is entitled to a "reasonable time" to assess
comparability.[^254] Each of these decisions is a step in the right
direction.

I am still concerned, however, about the government's central role at
the involuntary relocation phase. The parties would be well served by a
process that is reliably prompt and provides incentives for good faith
negotiations. Alternative dispute resolution procedures, such as binding
arbitration, may provide the answer.

Congress has strongly supported the use of alternative dispute
resolution in administrative law contexts.[^255] In following this lead,
the Commission has previously adopted similar alternative dispute
resolution approaches.[^256] For example, recently the Commission
encouraged alternative dispute resolution for SMR relocation under Part
90 of our rules: "\[d\]isputes arising out of the costs of relocation,
such as disputes over the amount of reimbursement required, will be
encouraged to use expedited ADR procedures. ADR procedures provide
several alternative methods such as binding arbitration, mediation, or
other ADR techniques."[^257] I believe a similar approach would benefit
the parties in all relocation proceedings.

Binding arbitration would create an efficient "end game" for parties
that cannot reach an agreement during the negotiation phase. Today,
these parties would face a potentially lengthy and uncertain Commission
proceeding to assess comparability. If at the end of an unsuccessful
negotiation phase, however, a new entrant could choose binding
arbitration, the results would be more prompt and certain.[^258] Under
binding arbitration, the parties would face the prospect of submitting
alternative proposals to an arbitrator who would simply choose one or
the other. Such a process would presumably encourage the parties to be
reasonable in their relocation proposals and would largely remove the
Commission from the transaction. Moreover, binding arbitration could and
should be completed in a short time frame, perhaps within sixty days.
Such a process would both encourage agreements and resolve any remaining
disputes with minimal transaction costs.[^259]

**Conclusion**

Relocation policy is one of the greatest challenges facing this
Commission. In the years to come, we will increasingly be forced to rely
on spectrum clearing as a method of freeing up spectrum for new
services. This challenge creates a corresponding historic opportunity:
to get relocation policy right. Only with an efficient relocation policy
can the telecommunications marketplace function properly for incumbents
and new entrants alike. I believe today's Order is a step in that
direction. I am hopeful, however, that in future proceedings the
Commission will move towards a relocation policy that provides greater
certainty along with more efficient procedures.

[^1]: 47 C.F.R. § 2.106.

[^2]: *See* Rulemaking to Amend Parts 1, 2, 21, and 25 of the
    Commission's Rules to Redesignate the 27.5-29.5 GHz Frequency Band,
    to Reallocate the 29.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Band, to Establish Rules
    and Policies for Local Multipoint Distribution Service and for Fixed
    Satellite Service, *First Report and Order and Fourth Notice of
    Proposed Rulemaking*, CC Docket No. 92-297, 11 FCC Rcd 19005 (1996)
    (*28 GHz First Report and Order*). The *28 GHz First Report and
    Order* established a band plan for the Ka-band. The "Ka-band" refers
    to the space-to-Earth (downlink) frequencies at 17.7-20.2 GHz and
    the corresponding Earth-to-space (uplink) frequencies at 27.5-30.0
    GHz (the "28 GHz band").

[^3]: ^?^ *See* Redesignation of the 17.7-19.7 GHz Frequency Band,
    Blanket Licensing of Satellite Earth Stations in the 17.7-20.2 GHz
    and 27.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Bands, and the Allocation of Additional
    Spectrum in the 17.3-17.8 GHz and 24.75-25.25 GHz Frequency Bands
    for Broadcast Satellite-Service Use, *Notice of Proposed
    Rulemaking*, IB Docket No. 98-172, 13 FCC Rcd 19923 (1998) (*18 GHz
    NPRM*).

[^4]: *Cf.* 47 C.F.R. §§ 25.203, 101.103(d)(discussing coordination
    procedures).

[^5]: ^?^ *See* Amendment of Part 2 of the Commission's Rules to
    Allocate Spectrum for the Fixed-Satellite Service in the 17.8-20.2
    GHz Band for Government Use, *Memorandum Opinion and Order*, 10 FCC
    Rcd 9931 (1995)..

[^6]: Existing Fixed Stations have, during the grandfathering period, a
    co-primary designation. This means that, as earth stations populate
    the satellite service area they must accept any interference
    received from these previously licensed stations, or pay for their
    relocation to another frequency (or an alternative media, such as
    fiber optics) with equivalent link performance..

[^7]: The 24 GHz Service in the 24 GHz band was formerly known as the
    Digital Electronic Messaging Service (DEMS).

[^8]: A list of the commenters is provided in Appendix C.

[^9]: *See, e.g.,* Comments of the American Petroleum Institute at 6
    ("Sharing spectrum with ubiquitously deployed satellite earth
    stations on a co-primary basis has proven unworkable in the past,
    and similar sharing in the 18 GHz band would result in further loss
    of spectrum for fixed services and exclusion of fixed services from
    large geographical areas") (API Comments); Comments of the Cellular
    Telecommunications Industry Association at 5-6 ("Unacceptable
    interference is likely to occur when microwave fixed services and
    satellite services operate in the same frequency bands") (CTIA
    Comments); Comments of the Fixed Point-to-Point Section of the
    Telecommunications Industry Association at app. A ("The Fixed
    Section does not believe it will be feasible for the FS and FSS to
    share the entire band, certainly not with blanket licensing of earth
    stations") (TIA-Fixed Section Comments).

[^10]: *See 18 GHz NPRM* at ¶ 1; *see also, e.g.,* Comments of SBC
    Communications, Inc. at 2 ("SBC agrees that sharing between these
    services is not possible and supports the separation of the services
    into discrete segments of \[the\] band") (SBC Comments); Comments of
    Winstar Communications, Inc. at 7 ("The Commission correctly
    recognized in its Notice that blanket-licensed, ubiquitously
    deployed earth station terminals and terrestrial fixed service
    facilities cannot share the same frequencies") (Winstar Comments).

[^11]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 2.106. It should be noted that United States
    Government systems are also authorized to operate in part of the 18
    GHz band, specifically, in the 17.8-20.2 GHz band. *See id.* This
    *Report and* *Order*, however, concerns only non-Government
    operation in the 18 GHz band. Furthermore, the 18.6-18.8 GHz band is
    allocated for both Government and non-Government Earth Exploration
    Satellite (EES) (passive) and Space Research (SR) (passive). *See
    id*.

[^12]: *See 28 GHz First Report and Order*, *supra* note 1. Satellite
    uplinks in the 28 GHz band are paired with satellite downlinks in
    the 18 GHz band, which caused the Commission to act on both bands in
    the *28 GHz First Report and Order*.

[^13]: *Id.* ¶ 27, at 19015-16.

[^14]: *See id.* ¶¶ 42, 77, at 19024, 19036. Services designated for
    primary domestic licensing priority are specified by capital letters
    and services designated for secondary domestic licensing priority
    are specified by the use of lower case letters. We note that the *28
    GHz First Report and Order* only adopted changes to Part 25 of the
    Commission's Rules, and did not modify the Allocation Table in Part
    2, an action taken by this *Report and Order.*

[^15]: Terrestrial Fixed Service.

[^16]: In the limited instances where co-frequency sharing is required,
    the ubiquitous deployment of earth stations will not be permitted.

[^17]: Government FSS systems have been coordinated for several years.
    *See* *supra* note 5.

[^18]: *See* Authorizations of: Comm, Inc. (DA 97-968); GE American
    Communications, Inc. (DA 97-970); EchoStar Satellite Corporation (DA
    97-969); Hughes Communications Galaxy, Inc. (DA 97-971); KaStar
    Satellite Communications Corp. (DA 97-972); Lockheed Martin
    Corporation (DA 97-973); Loral Space & Communications Ltd. (DA
    97-974); Morning Star Satellite Company, L.L.C. (DA 97-975); NetSat
    28 Company, L.L.C. (DA 97-976); Orion Atlantic, L.P. (DA 97-979);
    Orion Network Systems, Inc. (DA 97-977); PanAmSat Licensee Corp. (DA
    97-978); and VisionStar, Inc. (DA 97-980) (International Bureau, May
    9, 1997). The Commission also assigned the thirteen GSO/FSS
    licensees orbital locations. *See* Assignment of Orbital Locations
    to Space Station in the Ka-band, *Order*, 12 FCC Rcd 13737 (1997).

[^19]: *See* Application of Teledesic Corporation for Authority to
    Construct, Launch, and Operate a Low Earth Orbit Satellite System in
    the Domestic and International Fixed Satellite Service, *Order*, 12
    FCC Rcd 3154 (1997).

[^20]: *18 GHz NPRM* ¶ 1.

[^21]: *See* redesignation discussion, *infra.*

[^22]: *See 18 GHz NPRM* ¶ 40. The "grandfather" provision proposed that
    satellite earth stations would be required to coordinate with
    grandfathered terrestrial fixed services, however, grandfathered
    systems would not be permitted to modify their operations "in any
    manner that might increase interference to satellite earth
    stations." *See id.*

[^23]: *See id.* ¶ 41.

[^24]: *See Petition for Interim Relief*, filed by the Fixed
    Point-to-Point Communications Section, Wireless Communications
    Division of the Telecommunications Industry Association on November
    2, 1998; *Emergency Request for Immediate Relief*, filed by the
    Independent Cable & Telecommunications Association on November 5,
    1998.

[^25]: *See* Redesignation of the 17.7-19.7 GHz Frequency Band, Blanket
    Licensing of Satellite Earth Stations in the 17.7-20.2 GHz and
    27.5-30.3 GHz Frequency Bands, and the Allocation of Additional
    Spectrum in the 17.3-17.8 GHz and 24.75-25.25 GHz Frequency Bands
    for Broadcast Satellite Service Use, *Order*, IB Docket No. 98-172,
    14 FCC Rcd 3086 (1999) (*18 GHz Relief Order*).

[^26]: *See id.* We reasoned that: (1) there was no other spectrum
    available at that time in the 18 GHz band or any other band for new
    or existing PCO operations; (2) PCOs would be unable to meet
    consumer needs for new services if relief was not granted; and (3)
    maintaining the proposed cut-off date for PCOs would be inconsistent
    with our expressed goal of increased competition in the provision of
    new video services.

[^27]: *Id.* ¶ 14. We also adopted several requirements to prevent
    warehousing of the spectrum involved.

[^28]: *See* *18 GHz NPRM* ¶ 43. It should be noted that GSO/FSS and
    NGSO/FSS operators propose to blanket license small antenna
    satellite earth stations that are transmit/receive end user
    terminals; thus, we consider both the uplink and downlink portions
    of the Ka-band in our consideration of blanket licensing.

[^29]: *See id*. ¶ 45.

[^30]: *See* *Public Notice*, Report No. 2208 (rel. July 1, 1997). The
    Commission placed the petition on public notice and assigned it
    rulemaking number RM-9118. *See id.* Although the petition also
    requested that the Commission adopt a 4.5º orbital spacing policy
    for use in the 17.3-17.8 GHz and 24.75-25.25GHz bands, the
    Commission concluded that it was premature to address this issue at
    the present time. *See 18 GHz NPRM* ¶ 82.

[^31]: These allocations conform to the International Telecommunication
    Union Region 2 BSS allocation. *See* ITU Radio Regulations Footnote
    S5.517 (stating that the Region 2 allocation to BSS in the 17.3-17.8
    shall be afforded primary status as of April 1, 2007); ITU Radio
    Regulations Footnote S5.535 (stating that the 24.75-25.25 GHz band
    shall be designated for feeder links of BSS).

[^32]: *See supra* notes 8-9.

[^33]: *See* API Comments at 6 (noting that at recent meetings of the
    National Spectrum Managers Association and the Fixed Wireless
    Communications Coalition, there were reports of coordination
    difficulties in the 4 GHz frequency band, due to the deployment of
    satellite earth stations); CTIA Comments at 5 ("CMRS carriers raise
    serious concerns as to the feasibility of sharing in the 18 GHz band
    due to frequency coordination problems and the adverse impact on new
    or expanded microwave uses"); ICTA Reply Comments at 2 ("There is
    simply no viable method for private cable operators to coordinate
    with potentially tens of thousands of blanket-licensed GSO/FSS users
    deployed at unknown locations").

[^34]: ^?^ Teledesic Reply Comments at 3; *see also* Comments of Pegasus
    Development Corporation at 6 (stating that segmentation "is
    necessary for consistently high quality reception of Ka-band FSS
    signals in urban areas and the achievement of a truly national
    ubiquitous satellite service").

[^35]: *See* *18 GHz NPRM* at ¶ 24.

[^36]: We proposed that, effective April 1, 2007, the 17.3-17.8 GHz
    frequency segment be designated for co-primary use by both
    terrestrial fixed service operations and BSS downlink use.

[^37]: *See* *18 GHz NRPM* ¶ 30. We tentatively concluded that this 1250
    MHz of primary use spectrum could accommodate the needs of
    terrestrial fixed services. We noted that the 17.7-18.3 GHz band
    could be used to accommodate CARS, terrestrial fixed video
    operators, and broadcast auxiliary services. Moreover, we noted that
    this spectrum, along with the 650 MHz of co-primary spectrum, should
    allow for the creation and implementation of a new channelization
    plan for terrestrial fixed services operating in the 18 GHz
    frequency band. *See id.* ¶ 31.

[^38]: *See* *id.* ¶ 30. We stated that the primary proposal's
    designation of this 500 MHz of spectrum to GSO/FSS, in addition to
    the 500 MHz of spectrum currently already allocated to GSO/FSS on a
    primary basis at 19.7-20.2 GHz, would provide GSO/FSS with 1000 MHz
    of downlink spectrum. We tentatively concluded that these
    designations would adequately accommodate the needs of GSO/FSS
    Ka-band satellite service. *See id.* ¶ 32.

[^39]: *See id.* ¶ 30. We tentatively concluded that this 500 MHz should
    satisfy NGSO/FSS spectrum requirements. *See id.* ¶ 32.

[^40]: *See id.* ¶ 30. We tentatively concluded that co-primary sharing
    in this band between MSS/FL and terrestrial fixed service operations
    should continue because of the limited number of MSS/FL earth
    stations expected to be deployed. *See id.* ¶ 32.

[^41]: *See, e.g.*, Comments of Tadiran Microwave Networks at attachment
    ("This *NPRM* SIGNIFICANTLY reduces the frequencies available to the
    FS, continuing the trend of erosion of FS spectrum by the Commission
    over the last several years"); TIA-Fixed Section Comments at 2-3.
    TIA-Fixed Section contends that the primary proposal reduces fixed
    service spectrum by 53.3%. It also points out that the remaining
    46.7% must be shared between fixed service point-to-point services
    with fixed service point-to-multipoint service, and coordination
    between these service would be difficult, thus reducing the spectrum
    further. *See id.*; Comments of the Fixed Wireless Communications
    Coalition at 3-4 (arguing that our primary proposal reduces
    terrestrial fixed service use of the 18 GHz band by 53.3%, and that
    the inability of terrestrial fixed point-to-point licensees to
    coordinate effectively with terrestrial point-to-multipoint systems
    to avoid interference would reduce available spectrum for
    terrestrial fixed service users) (FWCC Comments).

[^42]: *See, e.g.*, Comments of GE American Communications, Inc. at 4-9
    (arguing that the primary proposal "would reduce the amount of
    downlink spectrum realistically available to GSO/FSS systems to less
    than 1000 MHz") (GE Americom Comments); Comments of Hughes
    Electronics, Inc., at 2, 4-8 (stating that while Hughes supports
    band segmentation, GSO/FSS satellite systems require access to, at a
    minimum, 1000 MHz of primary spectrum) (Hughes Comments); Comments
    of PanAmSat Corporation at 2-4 (PanAmSat Comments). PanAmSat,
    however, recognizes that "it may be difficult to develop a band plan
    that both designates 1000 MHz for primary use by GSO/FSS and
    satisfies all other licenses." *Id.*

[^43]: *See* *18 GHz NPRM* at ¶ 35.

[^44]: *See* Comments of Spectrum & Orbit Utilization Section of the
    Satellite Communications Division of the Telecommunications Industry
    Association at 2-3 (TIA-SOUS Comments).

[^45]: *See* Comments of Loral Space & Communications Ltd. at 3-4 (Loral
    Comments). Loral's objection to this modified proposal, like that of
    TIA-SOUS, is based on the belief that sharing between the services
    is not feasible. Loral states that "\[t\]his proposal fundamentally
    conflicts with the Commission's observations that FS/FSS sharing is
    not feasible in these bands." *Id.* at 4.

[^46]: *See* Comments of SBC Communications, Inc. at 6-7 (SBC Comments).
    SBC makes an unsupported, general statement that the additional 100
    MHz would help terrestrial fixed services.

[^47]: Under our primary proposal, the 18.3-18.55 GHz band would house
    ubiquitous blanket-licensed satellite earth stations; thus, under
    this modified proposal, these FSS systems would have to share the
    18.3-18.4 GHz band with terrestrial fixed service. This proposal
    would therefore reduce the amount of spectrum that could be blanket
    licensed for the FSS.

[^48]: ^?^ *See infra.*

[^49]: *See* *18 GHz NPRM* at ¶ 36. We asked whether continued sharing
    in this segment of the 18 GHz band would better meet the needs of
    GSO/FSS and terrestrial fixed service licensees.

[^50]: *See* Comsearch Comments, at 4.

[^51]: *See id.* at 4-5. Comsearch further contends that this allocation
    provides alternative spectrum for displaced narrowband split
    channels operating on a 5 MHz bandwidth. *See id.* The current
    frequency separation provisions for CARS use in the 18 GHz band can
    be found at 47 C.F.R. § 78.18 (4). Other terrestrial fixed service
    systems operate according to a channeling plan defined in the
    Commission's Rules. *See* 47 C.F.R. §§ 74.402, 78.18, 101.147.

[^52]: *See* Reply Comments of Airtouch Communications, Inc. at 10-11
    (Airtouch Reply Comments). Airtouch also contends that "\[s\]hared
    use of spectrum will significantly degrade the ability of
    terrestrial fixed service users to deploy new systems and provide
    important services." *Id.* at 8. "Accordingly, Comsearch's proposal
    fails to serve the public interest and should be rejected." *Id.*

[^53]: *See id.* at 10-11. Airtouch notes that, under the Comsearch
    proposal, FSS operations maintain the full 2000 MHz of spectrum in
    the 18 GHz band, of which 750 MHz is a primary designation, while
    terrestrial services would have no unshared primary spectrum.

[^54]: *See* Fixed Wireless Communications Coalition Reply Comments at 6
    (FWCC Reply Comments).

[^55]: *See* Comsearch Comments at 6 (stating that they "agree with the
    Commission's tentative conclusion that sharing between ubiquitously
    deployed earth stations and terrestrial fixed microwave is
    impractical"). Comsearch, however, proposed that FSS use in this
    band would be non-ubiquitous. *See id.* at 5. Comsearch recommends
    that service rules be implemented to solve any possible sharing
    problems that would result from its proposal. *See id.* at 7-8.

[^56]: *See* ICTA Comments.

[^57]: *See 18 GHz NPRM* ¶ 38.

[^58]: *See supra* notes 8-9 and accompanying text.

[^59]: Low power point-to-multipoint terrestrial fixed systems may
    continue to be licensed and operate on a co-primary basis with
    NGSO/FSS in the 18.82-18.87 GHz and 19.16-19.21 GHz bands.

[^60]: We show the band 19.7-20.2 GHz in this spectrum table merely to
    illustrate the total spectrum available to the GSO/FSS.

[^61]: GSO/FSS licensees also have 500 megahertz of primary downlink
    spectrum at 19.7-20.2 GHz.

[^62]: See letter from William T. Hatch of the NTIA to to Dale M.
    Hatfield of the FCC, dated March 29, 2000.

[^63]: ^?^ Throughout the 18 GHz band there are a number of existing
    terrestrial fixed service channelization plans. These channelization
    plans include paired channels that can be used for either expanded
    one-way or two-way communications. While not modifying any of these
    channelization plans at this time, the revised band designations
    have been designed to have a minimal impact on the existing channel
    structure, in order to balance the spectrum requirements of existing
    operations and the requirements of new and innovative services.
    Although we could adopt revised channelization plans consistent with
    the redesignations adopted in this *Report and Order*, we choose not
    to do so at the present time, preferring instead to continue to
    monitor implementation developments in the 17.7-19.7 GHz band.

[^64]: Comments of ABC, Inc. at 2 (ABC Comments).

[^65]: *See* Comments of Pegasus Development Corp. at 4-7 (proposing two
    alternative band plans to our primary proposal, both of which
    expressly propose to designate the 17.7-18.3 GHz segment to
    terrestrial fixed service for primary use) (Pegasus Comments);
    Comments of Tadiran Microwave Networks at 3 (requesting that the
    Commission designate spectrum, including the 17.3-18.3 GHz band, for
    primary use by terrestrial fixed service operators); TIA-Fixed
    Section Comments at 12 (urging the Commission to designate the
    17.7-18.58 GHz segment to terrestrial fixed service on a primary
    basis); TIA-SOUS Comments at 4 ("The 17.7-18.3 GHz portion of the
    Ka-band should be designated FS point-to-point links").

[^66]: *See* Comsearch Comments at 4 (asking that the Commission adopt a
    band plan that retains a co-primary status in the 17.7-18.55 GHz
    band for terrestrial fixed service and GSO/FSS shared use); Hughes
    Reply Comments at 7-11 (proposing that we adopt a band plan that
    designates the 17.8-18.6 GHz band to terrestrial fixed service on a
    primary basis and thus grant primary status to GSO/FSS in the
    18.1-18.6GHz segment). Their proposal overlaps the band under
    discussion in this section of this *Report and Order.*

[^67]: *See 18 GHz Relief Order*, *supra*. We note that the Commission
    is currently considering in a pending rulemaking whether to open the
    12 GHz band to PCOs and multichannel video program distributors
    (MVPD). *See* Petition for Rulemaking to Amend Eligibility
    Requirements in Part 78 Regarding 12 GHz Cable Television Relay
    Service, *Notice of Proposed Rulemaking*, CSB Doc. No. 99-250,
    (1999). Nothing in this *Report and Order* is intended to prejudge
    that rulemaking.

[^68]: While definitions of "link" may vary, we define a link as one
    point-to-point or point--to-multi-point channel, as specified in one
    of our applicable channelization plans. Using that definition, there
    are approximately 170,000 fixed links in the 18.142-18.580 GHz band.

[^69]: ^?^ ICTA contends that there are currently 2,400 PCO links in the
    18.142-18.58 GHz band throughout the United States. ICTA notes that
    "\[b\]ecause the configuration of most private cable links follows a
    hub and spoke architecture where a single transmit site will serve
    multiple receive sites, each link creates its own exclusion zone
    (that can extend as far as 45 miles from the cable transmit site)
    where satellite receivers will be unable to operate." ICTA Comments
    at 14. ICTA further states that their systems would be virtually
    useless without the full block of bandwidth available. ICTA comments
    at 27.

[^70]: *See* ICTA Comments at 6. As previously stated, CARS and PCOs use
    channels in the 18.142-18.58 GHz band.

[^71]: AESCO Systems, Inc. correctly notes that many coaxial cable
    systems have been upgraded to 550 MHz and 750 MHz systems, allowing
    those cable operators to offer consumers more channels. Eliminating
    the use of 280 MHz of contiguous spectrum, as proposed in the *18
    GHz NPRM*'s primary proposal, would inhibit PCOs operating in the 18
    GHz band from effectively competing with these upgraded coaxial
    cable systems. *See* Comments of AESCO Systems, Inc. at 3. The
    proposed plan to limit terrestrial fixed service in this band would
    have the effect of rendering these terrestrial services
    non-competitive with wired cable service, since the systems operate
    in a block conversion mode (using existing analog 6 MHz channels)
    and need to carry as many channels as possible. *See* ICTA comments
    Engineering Statement at 4. The remaining spectrum available to PCOs
    under our primary proposal equals 158 MHz (18.142-18.3 GHz band)
    plus another 30 MHz at 18.55-18.58. At 6 MHz per channel, this would
    equate to at most 31 channels, and that assumes that equipment can
    be designed to overcome the proposed spectrum separation (18.14-18.3
    GHz and 18.55-18.8 GHz).

[^72]: *See* GE Americom Comments at 6-7.

[^73]: TIA-Fixed Section Comments at 2; *see also* Comments of RCN
    Telecom Services, Inc. at 7-9 (arguing that under our primary
    proposal, the primary allocation of the 17.7-18.3 GHz and co-primary
    allocation of the 18.55-18.8 GHz band do not provide viable
    alternatives for private video providers) (RCN Comments); ICTA
    Comments at 7 ("The assumption that the 17.7-18.3 GHz band provides
    a viable alternative for the private cable industry is fundamentally
    flawed").

[^74]: *See 18 GHz NPRM* ¶ 27.

[^75]: *See* KaStar Satellite Communications Corporation Comments at 7-8
    (arguing that coordination in this band will be extremely difficult,
    "resulting in indefinite delays or, worse yet, the inability \[of
    FSS operators\] to utilize the spectrum in a meaningful way")
    (KaStar Comments).

[^76]: *See* PanAmSat Comments at 3.

[^77]: Teledesic Comments at 7.

[^78]: *See* *id.*

[^79]: *See, e.g.*, Airtouch Reply Comments at 5 (recommending that we
    "modify the band plan to allow terrestrial FS and Geostationary
    Orbit Fixed Satellite Service shared use of the 18.3-18.55 GHz band,
    in lieu of 18.55-18.8 GHz, in order to maintain, as closely as
    possible, current terrestrial uses of the 18 GHz band); KaStar
    Comments at 7-10 (urging the Commission to modify the band plan by
    "\[d\]esignat\[ing\] 250 MHz from 18.3-18.55 GHz for GSO FSS and FS
    use on a co-primary basis; \[and\] \[d\]esignat\[ing\] 250 MHz from
    18.55-18.8 GHz for GSO FSS use on a primary basis"); Lockheed
    Comments at 3-5; TIA-Fixed Section Comments at 3-4 (requesting that
    we modify our band plan to give terrestrial fixed service co-primary
    status in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band and a primary allocation to
    GSO/FSS at 18.58-18.8 GHz).

[^80]: ^?^ *See* Airtouch Comments at 8.

[^81]: Comments of AT&T Wireless Services, Inc. at 3. By "lower half,"
    we believe they are referring to paired channels in the 18.5-18.8
    GHz band.

[^82]: *See* discussion of continued co-primary use by existing fixed
    stations infra.

[^83]: *See 18 GHz NPRM* ¶ 32.

[^84]: *See* Lockheed Martin Corporation Application for Authority to
    Modify its Authorization for a Global Ka-band Satellite
    Communications System in Geostationary Orbit, File No.
    35-SAT-MP/ML-98, 2, 9 (filed Dec. 22, 1997); Lockheed Martin
    Corporation Application for a Global Ka-band Satellite
    Communications System in Geostationary Orbit, File Nos. 39 through
    43-SAT-P/LA-98, 37 (filed Dec.22, 1998). We note that this system
    proposes to use 125 MHz channels extending down to 18.55 GHz, which
    would require coordination with the FS if we were to extend the
    co-primary FS allocation by 30 MHz up to 18.58 GHz.

[^85]: *See* Lockheed applications, note 91, and ITU-R Document
    WP-4A/29, *Proposed Recommendation to Change the Power-flux Density
    Limits in the 18.6 GHz-18.8 GHz Band* (1998). We note that this
    recommendation was adopted at the World Radio Conference 2000
    (WRC-2000) and will become effective internationally on January 1,
    2002.

[^86]: ^?^ *See* BellSouth Reply Comments at 7; TIA-Fixed Section
    Comments at 3-4.

[^87]: Bellsouth Reply Comments at 7.

[^88]: For example, PCOs might be willing to relinquish their operating
    rights within the 18.55-18.58 GHz band if the GSO/FSS operator
    provided 30 MHz of satellite programming directly to each PCO
    receiving site. Another option might be for the GSO/FSS operator to
    help PCO operators install new equipment that is more spectrally
    efficient.

[^89]: While we note this loss of narrowband channel pairs due to our
    redesignations, we expect that such losses could be recouped by the
    development of new narrowband channelizations, which could be
    overlaid within the remaining Fixed Service designations. FWCC made
    such a proposal in its comments at 5.

[^90]: ^?^ Comments of Capital Broadcasting Co., Inc., *et al.* at 3.

[^91]: *See* CTIA Comments at 5 ("Unacceptable interference is likely to
    occur when microwave fixed services and satellite services operate
    in the same frequency bands, regardless of whether satellite
    co-primary operations are expected to be ubiquitously or
    non-ubiquitously deployed"); ICTA Comments at Appendix (noting that
    some existing terrestrial fixed systems will receive harmful
    interference from GSO/FSS systems because they point at the orbit).

[^92]: This arc is from horizon to horizon, reaching its highest
    elevation angle for positions in the geostationary orbit at the
    longitudinal position of the observer.

[^93]: ^?^ In the case of Fixed Stations in the 18.58-18.8 GHz band, the
    right to interference protection does not extend beyond the
    applicable period of continued co-primary status.

[^94]: ^?^ While we do not require such pointing, we emphasize that such
    designs are to be undertaken at the fixed station licensee's own
    risk, and future space stations will not be subject to any
    additional coordination requirements. We limit the protection of
    such future receivers to the requirement for the space station pfd
    to meet the limits specified in § 25.208.

[^95]: Considering the nature of the fixed service deployment in these
    bands, we believe that the actual number of fixed service receive
    antennas that will be pointing within 2 degrees of the usable
    portion of the geostationary-satellite orbit will be quite small,
    with a correspondingly small impact on fixed-satellite service
    licensees.

[^96]: ^?^ We refer to existing terrestrial fixed services licensed in
    the 18.3-18.8 GHz band with receivers that point within two degrees
    of the GSO as "Legacy Systems." All such existing systems must be
    protected from interference during the applicable period of
    continued co-primary status, including those operating in the
    18.58-18.8 GHz band. Only after the end of the applicable period of
    continued co-primary status would the protection of Legacy Systems
    be limited to the 18.3-18.58 GHz band. This means that any satellite
    system implementations during the applicable period of continued
    co-primary status must coordinate their space stations with Legacy
    Systems prior to launch, but only to the end of the applicable
    period of continued co-primary status if they operate in the
    18.58-18.8 GHz band.

[^97]: ^?^ The need for FS modification will be determined in the
    space-to-Earth coordination process discussed above.

[^98]: ^?^ The Commission has not established requirements for accuracy
    of transmitting and receiving site information, opening the
    possibility of inaccurate calculations in some cases.

[^99]: This information will be compiled by an outside party into a
    database to be used for both space station and earth coordination
    purposes and to assist the Commission in any future decision making
    regarding this band. The Commission will identify that party in a
    Public Notice issued subsequent to the release of this Order, after
    consultations with generally established frequency coordination
    houses. By compiling information in this fashion, we provide an
    opportunity for independent calculation of pointing direction. If
    the licensee wishes to modify its license to reflect the corrected
    information, it should file a separate application.

[^100]: While we generally expect that, as a result of this rulemaking,
    satellite operators will use all or part of the 18.3-18.58 GHz
    spectrum for gateway type earth stations to provide connectivity of
    their systems to and from the Internet and the Public Switched
    Telephone Network (PSTN), we do not define and mandate such use
    because we are aware that some GSO/FSS systems would not easily
    adapt to such a requirement. Because our over-arching objective is
    to render the band available to both the fixed service and the
    GSO/FSS service, we will merely require the GSO/FSS to make a
    judicious effort to find locations where satellite reception is
    possible in this band. We will monitor implementation and, if it
    appears that the fixed service is being excessively precluded in the
    establishment of future links, we will revisit this decision on our
    own motion. We also note that a request for a declaratory ruling and
    petition for rulemaking relating to this issue was filed by the FWCC
    on May 5, 1999.

[^101]: *See* Teledesic Reply Comments at 9-10 ("The history of the
    18.8-19.3 GHz band makes it imperative for the Commission to
    designate this full band for NGSO FSS use").

[^102]: *See* TIA-Fixed Section Comments at 3-4.

[^103]: *See* Teledesic Reply at 10-13.

[^104]: ^?^ *See* Lockheed Comments at 7-8. Other commenters submitting
    band plans also recognized the need to designate 500 MHz to NGSO/FSS
    on a primary basis. *See* KaStar Comments at 6; Pegasus Comments at
    4-6.

[^105]: *See* Ex Parte Letter from Mark A. Grannis on behalf of
    Teledesic, to Donald S. Abelson, Chief, International Bureau, FCC
    dated November 30, 1999, which details Teledesic's concern about
    this issue and explores the implications of four options in this
    regard.

[^106]: *See* the appropriate section in each rule part of Appendix A,
    e.g. section 101.91b for the full specification of "comparable
    facilities." Since these specifications comprise an engineering
    specification which corresponds to the common English meaning of the
    word "comparable" meaning the same, they are not discussed further
    in this text.

[^107]: ^?^ Clearly, the location of earth stations in certain areas
    will have a great associated cost. NGSO/FSS licensees can judge
    these costs/benefits at the time of acceptance of new subscribers.

[^108]: ^?^ *See also* discussion of relocation cost. infra

[^109]: ^?^ *See* Lockheed Comments at 8 ("Because there is no
    alternative downlink spectrum for Ka-band NGSO FSS systems, the
    Commission should redesignate the 18.8-19.3 GHz band for primary
    NGSO FSS use"); Teledesic Reply Comments at 10 (arguing that the
    18.8-19.3 GHz frequencies "are still the only frequencies in which
    NGSO FSS need not protect the geostationary arc").

[^110]: *See* Teledesic Reply Comments at 10 ("There is no practical way
    for an NGSO FSS system using any reasonable number of downlink
    carriers to use, for example, the full 500 MHz in rural areas but
    only a 460 MHz sub-band near an FS station").

[^111]: ^?^ *See* Pegasus Comments at 4-6 (arguing that this
    segmentation would allow MSS/FL gateways to share the lower portion
    of the band with terrestrial services and would give GSO/FSS more
    usable downlink spectrum).

[^112]: Motorola Reply Comments at 18-19 (arguing that Pegasus' proposed
    designation provides no benefit to any service and is
    "counterproductive and inconsistent with the public interest").

[^113]: SBC Comments at 4-5.

[^114]: *See* Motorola Reply Comments at 19 (arguing that "SBC's
    comments appear to be woefully outdated").

[^115]: *See 18 GHz NPRM* ¶ 33. Under the Commission's Rules, services
    utilizing spectrum on a secondary basis must not cause harmful
    interference to primary users to which frequencies are already
    assigned or to which frequencies may be assigned at a later date.
    Secondary systems cannot claim protection from harmful interference
    from stations of a primary user to which frequencies are already
    assigned or may be assigned at a later date. Secondary users can
    claim protection, however, from harmful interference caused by other
    secondary services to which frequency may be assigned at a later
    date. *See* 47 C.F.R. §§ 2.104 (d), 2.105(c)(3).

[^116]: *See* VisionStar Comments at 4.

[^117]: *See* Section 101.147(r)(10).

[^118]: *See Section* 101.147 (r)(10) of Appendix A to this *Report and
    Order.*

[^119]: *See, e.g.*, Lockheed Comments at 8-9 ("Lockheed Martin does not
    support the secondary FS use of spectrum designated for FSS use on a
    primary basis"); Loral Comments at 7-8 ("Loral does not believe that
    the Commission's proposal to allow secondary operations on a
    non-interference basis by both terrestrial fixed service and FSS is
    feasible"); TIA-SOUS at 3-4 ("The Commission should not permit
    secondary FS operations in FSS bands"); Hughes Reply Comments at 13
    (arguing that "there is no reason to allow secondary terrestrial
    uses of the FSS primary bands").

[^120]: ^?^ TIA-SOUS Comments at 3; *see also* Teledesic Reply Comments
    at 12-13 (arguing that secondary allocations to terrestrial fixed
    services in FSS primary bands would result in increased costs and
    delayed deployment of satellite service without providing
    corresponding benefits to terrestrial fixed service).

[^121]: ^?^ *See* Lockheed Comments at 8 (stating that because
    terrestrial fixed service operations transmit, and FSS earth
    stations only receive in the 18 GHz band, secondary terrestrial
    fixed services transmitting in an FSS primary band can cause
    significant interference to a receiving FSS earth station).

[^122]: *See* TIA-SOUS Comments at 3-4. (noting that possible delays
    caused by secondary terrestrial licensees would not be tolerated by
    prospective customers); Teledesic Reply Comments at 13 (arguing that
    secondary terrestrial use would cause increased costs and an
    undesired quality of service).

[^123]: ^?^ *See* Ex Parte letter from Mark A. Grannis on behalf of
    Teledesic, to Donald S. Abelson, Chief, International Bureau, FCC,
    dated November 30, 1999, also cited above.

[^124]: ^?^ *See* *18GHz NPRM* ¶ 40. We do not need to consider or grant
    grandfather status to FSS operations, for there are currently no
    satellite operations deployed in the 18 GHz band. Under this
    proposal, terrestrial fixed service operators that filed and were
    granted after the "cut-off" date would have to operate on a
    secondary basis. As previously mentioned, TIA-Fixed Section and ICTA
    filed petitions for relief from the "cut-off" date of September 18,
    1998. *See supra.* In acting on these petitions, we ruled that the
    proposed cut-off date would be extended to the date of this *Report
    and Order* for PCOs; and we required that all non-PCO terrestrial
    fixed service operations housed in bands where terrestrial fixed
    services would lose primary status must comply with the September
    18, 1998 cut-off date. That decision is now moot. *See supra* note
    23.

[^125]: *See* *18 GHz NPRM* ¶ 40.

[^126]: ^?^ *See id.* ¶ 41.

[^127]: *See* Redevelopment of Spectrum to Encourage Innovation in the
    Use of New Telecommunications Technologies, *First Report and Order
    and Third Notice of Proposed Rulemaking*, 7 FCC Rcd 6886 (1992);
    *Second Report and Order*, 8 FCC Rcd 6495 (1993); *Third Report and
    Order and Memorandum Opinion and Order*, 8 FCC Rcd 6589 (1993)
    (Redevelopment *Third R&O*); *Memorandum Opinion and Order*, 9 FCC
    Rcd 1943 (1994); *Second Memorandum and Order*, 9 FCC Rcd 7797
    (1994).

[^128]: ^?^ *See* Amendment of Section 2.106 of the Commission's Rules
    to Allocate Spectrum at 2 GHz for Use by the Mobile-Satellite
    Service, *First Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed
    Rulemaking*, 12 FCC Rcd 7388, 7396-7407; 7414-21 (1997) (subsequent
    history omitted).

[^129]: ^?^ The full specification of permissible modifications are
    given in each rule part as shown in Appendix A, *e.g*. section
    101.97.

[^130]: ^?^ Lockheed Comments at 10. Lockheed points to the Commission's
    *28 GHz Second Report and Order* to point out correctly that we have
    dismissed pending applications in the 31 GHz band to promote local
    multipoint distribution service. *See* Rulemaking to Amend Parts 1,
    2, 21, and 25 of the Commission's Rules to Redesignate the 27.5-29.5
    GHz Frequency Band, to Reallocate the 29.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Band,
    to Establish Rules and Procedures for Local Multipoint Distribution
    Service and for Fixed Satellite Services, *Second Report and Order,
    Order on Reconsideration, and Fifth Notice of Proposed Rulemaking*,
    12 FCC Rcd 12545, 12588-89 (1997) (*28 GHz Second Report and
    Order*).

[^131]: *See 18 GHz NPRM* ¶ 40 (emphasis added).

[^132]: *See, e.g.*, Hughes Comments at 11-12; Lockheed Comments at 13;
    Loral Comments at 4; Pegasus Comments at 7-8; Teledesic at 13-15;
    TIA-SOUS Comments at 8-9; GE Americom Reply Comments at 9-10; KaStar
    Reply Comments at 9-11; PanAmSat Reply Comments at 5-6.

[^133]: *See 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*
    F.C.C.R. 6886,6889-90 (1992); *Second Report and Order, 8* F.C.C.R.
    6495 (1993); Third Report and Order and Memorandum Opinion and
    Order, 8 F.C.C.R. 6589 (1993); Memorandum Opinion and Order, 9
    F.C.C.R. 1943 (1994); Second Memorandum Opinion and Order, 9
    F.C.C.R. 7797 (1994).

[^134]: *See* Teledesic Comments at 11-15. In arguing for a sunset date
    of January 1, 2004 (the date by which incumbent terrestrial fixed
    services should become secondary users in the band and be
    financially responsible for relocation), Teledesic states that the
    grandfathering proposal requires continued sharing and coordination
    with permanently grandfathered terrestrial systems. *See id.* at 11.

[^135]: ^?^ *See* TIA-SOUS Comments at 8-9. TIA-SOUS contends further,
    that "\[p\]ermanent grandfathering therefore frustrates, rather than
    fosters, the public interest." *See id.*

[^136]: *See* GE Americom Reply Comments at 9-10 (requesting that we
    "set December 31, 2002 as the deadline for frequency relocation of
    FS systems. After that date, all remaining FS systems in
    GSO/FSS-specified bands will have only secondary allocations").

[^137]: ^?^ *See* American Petroleum Institute Reply Comments at 6.

[^138]: ^?^ GE Americom Reply Comments at 9.

[^139]: ^?^ *See* Teledesic Comments at 14-15 (arguing that efficiencies
    resulting from such a sunset date will make "both satellite and
    terrestrial service available to more of the public sooner, with
    lower transaction costs").

[^140]: ^?^ Pegasus Reply Comments at 6.

[^141]: *See* "Continued Rights of Existing Stations to Operate" section
    *supra*.

[^142]: ^?^ *See* TIA-SOUS Comments at 8 ("Because the Commission and
    all interested parties agree that ubiquitous FSS earth stations
    cannot operate on a co-frequency with the terrestrial FS, the
    Commission's grandfathering proposal should include a sunset
    provision that eventually will permit the ubiquitous deployment of
    blanket-licensed FSS earth stations").

[^143]: ^?^ *See* GE Americom Comments at 9-10 (arguing that this 3-year
    sunset "makes the most economic and common sense, as it allows
    terrestrial services time to move, but creates certainty as to the
    time satellites will be able to use their entire range of dedicated
    spectrum").

[^144]: ^?^ *See* Teledesic Comments at 13-15 (discussing the
    efficiencies of a January 1, 2004, sunset date); *see also* Hughes
    Reply Comments at 11-12 (stating that "this roughly five-year phase
    out period provides a reasonable accommodation for both terrestrial
    users and satellite systems"); KaStar Reply Comments at 9 (urging
    the Commission to adopt the January 1, 2004, sunset date, a date in
    which incumbents terrestrial services would become secondary and no
    longer entitled to relocation compensation); PanAmSat Reply Comments
    at 5-6 (arguing against any permanent grandfathering, and for a
    five-year phase out period).

[^145]: ^?^ *Cf.* Assn. of American Railroads Reply Comments at 8-9
    (arguing that because we, as well as the industries, have concluded
    that sharing is impracticable, grandfathered terrestrial systems
    will have to be relocated, and with satellite operators not likely
    to deploy their systems until the end of 2003, they should be
    absolved from paying any relocation costs).

[^146]: API Reply Comments at 6 (arguing that satellite services may not
    need this spectrum for 10-15 years).

[^147]: ^?^ *See 18 GHz NPRM* at ¶ 40. Under this proposal new satellite
    earth stations would have to coordinate with grandfathered
    terrestrial fixed service operations.

[^148]: ^?^ *Id.*

[^149]: ^?^ *See,* *e.g.*, AirTouch Comments10-12; API Comments at
    12-13; CTIA Comments at 4-5; GTE Comments at 6-7; Winstar Comments
    at 11-12.

[^150]: ^?^ *See* CTIA Comments at 4 (arguing that the inability to
    modify existing systems "will require CMRS carriers to abandon their
    existing grandfathered facilities..."); GTE Comments at 7
    ("Grandfathered licensees must have the ability to expand their
    networks to meet normal growth in a cost effective manner and to
    realize the maximum efficiency of their existing radio equipment");
    Winstar Comments at 12 ("Reasonable modifications must also be
    permitted to grandfathered systems so as to facilitate growth and
    other changes").

[^151]: ^?^ *See* Airtouch Comments 11-12 (citing 2 GHz Licensing Policy
    Statement, Public Notice, Mimeo No. 23115, May 14, 1992); Winstar
    Comments at 12 (citing In the Matter of Redevelopment of Spectrum to
    Encourage Innovation in the Use of New Telecommunications
    Technologies, *Third Report and Order and Memorandum Opinion and
    Order*, ET Doc. No 92-9, 8 FCC Rcd 6589 (1993)). The "2 GHz
    Licensing Policy Statement", and the Emerging Technologies *Third
    Report and Order* (which reaffirmed the Policy Statement) found that
    "\[a\]cceptable modifications include: minor modifications, changes
    in antenna azimuth, antenna beamwidth, antenna height, authorized
    power, channel loading, emission, station location, and ownership or
    control; reduction in authorized frequencies; or addition of
    frequencies not in the 2 GHz band." In the Matter of Redevelopment
    of Spectrum to Encourage Innovation and Use of New
    Telecommunications Technologies, *Third Report and Order and
    Memorandum Opinion and Order*, ET Dock. No. 92-9, 8 FCC 6589, at ¶
    53, n.72 (1993).

[^152]: *See* infra.

[^153]: *See* Airtouch Reply Comments at 9 (recognizing that
    modifications to existing systems may raise sharing concerns).

[^154]: ^?^ Again, we note that it is a goal of this proceeding to
    separate the different services into dedicated sub-bands. Allowing
    modifications that increase capacity and cause increased
    interference to satellite operations may delay the achievement of
    true segmentation.

[^155]: *See* *18 GHz NPRM* at ¶ 41.

[^156]: ^?^ *See* Redevelopment of Spectrum to Encourage Innovation in
    the Use of New Telecommunications Technologies, *First Report and
    Order and Third Notice of Proposed Rulemaking*, 7 FCC Rcd 6886
    (1992); *Second Report and Order*, 8 FCC Rcd 6495 (1993); *Third
    Report and Order and Memorandum Opinion and Order*, 8 FCC Rcd 6589
    (1993); *Memorandum Opinion and Order*, 9 FCC Rcd 1943 (1994);
    *Second Memorandum Opinion and Order*, 9 FCC Rcd 7797 (1994); *see
    also* 47 C.F.R. §§ 101.67-101.81.

[^157]: ^?^ *See, e.g.*, API Comments at 13-14; BellSouth Comments at 8;
    FWCC Comments at 7-8; UTC Comments at 5; Winstar Comments at 13-25;
    APCO Reply Comments at 2.

[^158]: ^?^ *See* Teledesic comments at 16.

[^159]: ^?^ *See id.* at 17.

[^160]: ^?^ *Id.* at 17.

[^161]: *See* Redevelopment *Third Report and Order*, 8 FCC Rcd. at
    6589-95; *see also* 47 C.F.R. § 101.75.

[^162]: ^?^ Redevelopment *Third Report and Order*, 8 FCC Rcd. at n.18.

[^163]: ^?^ *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, *Memorandum Opinion and Order and
    Third Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Order*, 13 FCC Rcd 23949
    (1998).

[^164]: ^?^ *See* 47 C.F.R §§ 101.69, 101.71.

[^165]: ^?^ Relocation costs that FSS licensees must pay include: all
    engineering, equipment, site and FCC fees, and any legitimate and
    prudent transaction expenses incurred by the terrestrial licensee
    that are directly attributable to an involuntary relocation (subject
    to a cap of 2% of the hard costs involved). We adopt the definition
    of "hard costs" provided in 47 C.F.R. § 101.75(a)(1). FSS licensees
    are not responsible for transaction costs incurred during the
    negotiation period or for fees that cannot be tied legitimately to
    the provision of comparable facilities.

[^166]: ^?^ These include all engineering and cost analyses of the
    relocation procedure and, identifying and obtaining, on the
    incumbent's behalf, new microwave frequencies and frequency
    coordination. *See* 47 C.F.R. § 101.75(a)(2).

[^167]: ^?^ Replacement systems for involuntarily relocated facilities
    must be at least equivalent to the existing facility with respect to
    throughput, reliability, and operating costs.

[^168]: Except in the 19.26-19.30 GHz band where the obligation is
    permanent, as discussed *supra*.

[^169]: *See* existing §101.75(b).

[^170]: *See 18 GHz NPRM* ¶ 43.

[^171]: ^?^ *See* *id*. ¶ 67.

[^172]: *See* the Second Report of the GSO FSS Ka-band Blanket licensing
    Industry Working Group, submitted September 27, 1999 (Second Blanket
    Licensing Report). This Report has been made a part of the record of
    this proceeding.

[^173]: The equation was originally recommended by ITU-R WP 4-9S. It is
    now included in the Report of the CPM to WRC-2000 and is currently a
    draft proposal of the United States to WRC-2000. We note that
    several major terrestrial fixed service companies participated
    actively in the development of the final pfd equation.

[^174]: At this time, we do not place a limit on the number or the type
    of earth stations that may be blanket authorized. Applicants,
    however, must specify such a number and the type of earth station at
    the time of filing.

[^175]: *See* discussion regarding secondary use in the 18 GHz band,
    supra. *Cf.* Loral Comments at 8-9 ("Loral does not support the
    Commission's proposal to require satellite operators to provide the
    location of each ubiquitously-deployed satellite earth terminal");
    Pegasus Comments at 9-10 ("Pegasus opposes the Commission's proposal
    that GSO FSS licensees make available records on location of earth
    stations and frequencies used by their systems"); TIA-SOUS Comments
    at 9("TIA-SOUS opposes the Commission's additional proposal to
    require satellite operators to provide the location of each
    ubiquitously-deployed satellite earth terminal).

[^176]: ^?^ *See* Loral Comments at 8; TIA-SOUS Comments at 10(arguing
    that this requirement may prove difficult and "would deny satellite
    companies some of the cost and efficiency advantages that blanket
    licensing is intended to provide").

[^177]: ^?^ *See* *18 GHz NPRM* ¶ 46.

[^178]: *See* Routine Licensing of Large Networks of Small Antenna Earth
    Stations Operating in the 12/14 GHz Frequency Bands, *Declaratory
    Order*, 11 FCC Rcd 1162 (1986). We have eliminated the annual
    reporting requirement for Ku-band licensees, instead mandating that
    a single report be submitted upon application for license renewal.
    *See* Streamlining the Commission's Regulations for Satellite
    Application and Licensing Procedures, *Report and Order*, 11 FCC Rcd
    21581 (1996). We decided to streamline this procedure in recognition
    that the Ku-band VSAT industry had matured sufficiently to the point
    where the need to monitor growth on an annual basis was no longer
    necessary. We anticipate that a similar streamlining would take
    place at some point in the future, upon maturation of the FSS
    markets.

[^179]: ^?^ Pegasus Comments at 9.

[^180]: ^?^ *See* *18 GHz NPRM* ¶¶ 47-62.

[^181]: ^?^ *See* 47 C.F.R. §§ 25.134, 25.208.

[^182]: ^?^ *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.209. Together, the power density limits
    and antenna performance standards ensure that conforming satellite
    systems will not emit power at off-axis angles at levels high enough
    to cause unacceptable interference to adjacent satellites spaced at
    2-degree intervals.

[^183]: ^?^ *See 18 GHz NPRM* ¶¶ 48-56, 59. Two-degree orbital spacing
    assumes a coordinate system referenced to the Earth's center.
    Off-axis angle is measured relative to the antenna boresight and the
    coordinate system is referenced to the Earth's surface
    (topocentric). This difference yields an increase in the size of the
    off-axis antenna angle measured between antenna boresight and a
    point on the geostationary arc, relative to the orbital spacing
    angle. This difference is on the order of 0.2° for an earth station
    along the equator, and decreases for earth stations at higher
    latitudes.

[^184]: *See* Report of the GSO Ka-Band Blanket Licensing Industry
    Working Group, Conditions for Compatibility with 2" Orbital Spacing
    (filed Nov. 19, 1998), an informal group to which all GSO/FSS
    licensees were invited.

[^185]: ^?^ *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.204; *28 GHz First Report and Order*,
    11 FCC Rcd. at 19005 (amending 47 C.F.R. § 25.204).

[^186]: *See* Letter from William T. Hatch of the NTIA to to Dale M.
    Hatfield Of the FCC, dated March 29, 2000.

[^187]: See Second Report of the GSO/FSS Ka-Band Licensing Industry
    Working Group, submitted as an *ex parte* comment on September 27,
    1999, and made a part of the record of this proceeding.

[^188]: BLWG Second Report at 2.

[^189]: *See* Appendix A of this *Report and Order*, Section 25.208.

[^190]: Hughes Ex Parte Filing, dated May 4, 2000.

[^191]: Our rules do not require prior authorization to deploy a
    receive-only terminal that receives signals from a U.S. licensed
    satellite. However, such terminals operate on an unprotected basis.
    Based on current deployment of terrestrial services in the
    18.3-18.58 GHz band, we anticipate that terminals receiving in this
    band could be deployed throughout much of the United States without
    experiencing interference from terrestrial services.

[^192]: *See, e.g.*, Onsat Petition for Declaratory Order, Waiver and
    Request for Expedited Action, File No. SAT-PDR-19990910-00091,
    Public Notice Report No. SA-00026, released September 23, 1999; FWCC
    Requests Concerning Licensing and Loading Standards for Earth
    Stations in the Fixed-Satellite Service, RM-9649, Public Notice
    Report No. 2334, released June 11, 1999; Public Notice, "Commission
    Launches Earth Station Streamlining Initiative," DA 99-1259,
    released June 25, 1999;

[^193]: ^?^ *See* *18 GHz NPRM* ¶ 68.

[^194]: ^?^ *See* KaStar Comments at 15-16 (urging the Commission to
    authorize blanket licensing in those bands where NGSO/FSS has
    primary status); Hughes Comments at 25-26 ("Hughes agrees with the
    Commission that blanket licensing in the NGSO FSS bands is clearly a
    critical and necessary step for deployment of those systems and
    should be addressed at the earliest possible date"); Motorola
    Comments at 18; Teledesic Comments at 8; Lockheed Reply Comments at
    12-13.

[^195]: *See 18GHz NPRM* ¶¶ 73-82. Specifically we proposed to add a
    footnote to Section 2.106 of the Commission\'s Rules which reads:
    \"The allocation to the broadcasting-satellite service in the band
    17.3-17.8 GHz shall come into effect on 1 April 2007.\" *Id.* ¶ 79.

[^196]: *Id.* ¶ 20 and ¶ 74.

[^197]: ^?^ *See, e.g.*, DIRECTV Comments at 7; Hughes Reply Comments at
    7-8.

[^198]: *See, e.g.*, AirTouch Comments at 9; BP Communications Alaska,
    Inc. Comments at 5; FWCC Comments at 9.

[^199]: *See* SkyBridge Comments at 2-4. *C.f.* API Comments at 11,
    Reply at 3 (requesting that the Commission seek comment on whether
    BSS even needs spectrum).

[^200]: *See* TIA-Fixed Section Comments Appendix at 10. We note that
    much of these concerns refer to losing the 18.145-18.58 GHz used for
    PCOs and CARS among others as was proposed at that time. *See,
    e.g.,* RCN Comments at 8; ICTA Comments at 294. Because this *Report
    and* *Order* preserves that spectrum, those commenters' concerns are
    now moot.

[^201]: *See* Pegasus Comments at 15; Lockheed Martin comments at 24.

[^202]: *See* *18 GHz NPRM* ¶ 79.

[^203]: *See, e.g.*, FWCC Comments at 9; DIRECTV Comments at 7-8.

[^204]: *See* DIRECTV Comments at 6, n.12.

[^205]: *See* Pegasus Comments at 15; Lockheed Martin reply comments at
    14-15.

[^206]: *See* letter from William T. Hatch of the NTIA to to Dale M.
    Hatfield Of the FCC, dated March 29, 2000.

[^207]: *See* DIRECTV Comments at 6, Reply Comments at 5 (citing News
    Release, "Commission Adopts Fifth Annual Report on Competition in
    Video Markets" (rel. Dec. 17, 1998) ("Competition Report News
    Release")) ("Just days ago, the Commission observed that cable
    operators continue to dominate some 85% of the multichannel video
    programming distribution ("MVPD") market, and correspondingly, that
    DBS operators are the best hope of diminishing cable's market
    power.").

[^208]: Because BSS services are provided to the general public, they
    are by definition ubiquitously licensed, a condition clearly
    incompatible with sharing the band with another widely distributed
    service.

[^209]: We also note that the U.S. government plans to eventually remove
    its radiolocation systems that currently operate in the 17.3-17.7
    GHz band. In the event that all of these stations are not relocated
    prior to the implementation of the BSS service, the Commission will
    work with the NTIA to ensure an orderly transition. *See* letter
    from "Hatch to Hatfield."

[^210]: *See* *18 GHz NPRM* at n. 116.

[^211]: *See id.* at ¶ 79.

[^212]: *See 18 GHz NPRM* ¶ 79; *see also* DIRECTV Comments at 12.

[^213]: Current U. S. Government operations of radiolocation systems in
    this band make the implementation of BSS service problematic prior
    to the year 2007.

[^214]: ^?^ *See* DIRECTV Comments at 12, n.31.

[^215]: Because we have decided that fixed station receivers may be
    pointed within 2 degrees of a space station, the greater the number
    of permissible space station locations the greater the number of
    cases where a fixed station would need to balance the potential
    costs and benefits of pointing at the orbit.

[^216]: ^?^ Because the problem of interference increases when the
    orbital spacing is reduced to 4.5º from 9º , more existing
    terrestrial fixed systems will potentially be pointing at the orbit,
    which in turn would result in greater expense to the BSS operator to
    repoint or relocate those systems. *See supra* ¶¶ 12-13.

[^217]: 24 GHZ SERVICE user receivers are in primary spectrum at
    24.25-24.45 GHz, a band that is not the subject of this proceeding.

[^218]: ^?^ This proceeding deals only with allocation issues for these
    new BSS and FSS services. We must establish service rules before
    these services may be implemented.

[^219]: ^?^ *See 24 GHz Service Notice of Proposed Rulemaking*, 64 FR
    71088, dated December 20, 1999.

[^220]: 24 GHz Service subscribers receive signals from the 24 GHZ
    SERVICE hubs on frequencies outside of the band this *Report and
    Order* adopts for BSS feeder links.

[^221]: The precise conditions for sharing between these two services
    will be established in a future rulemaking implementing the
    17.3-17.7 GHz BSS service and associated feeder links.

[^222]: *See* 5 U.S.C. § 603. The RFA, *see*, 5 U.S.C. § 601 *et seq*.,
    has been amended by the Contract With America Advancement Act of
    1996, Pub. L. No. 104-121, 110 Stat. 847 (1996) (CWAAA). Title II of
    the CWAAA is the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
    of 1996 (SBREFA).

[^223]: *See* Redesignation of the 17.7-19.7 GHz Frequency Band, Blanket
    Licensing of Satellite Earth Stations in the 17.7-20.2 GHz and
    27.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Bands, and the Allocation of Additional
    Spectrum in the 17.3-17.8 GHz and 24.75-25.25 GHz Frequency Bands
    for Broadcast Satellite-Service Use, *Notice of Proposed
    Rulemaking*, IB Docket No. 98-172, 13 FCC Rcd 19923 (1998) (*18 GHz
    NPRM*).at Appendix B.

[^224]: 5 U.S.C. § 604.

[^225]: 5 U.S.C. § 603(b)(3).

[^226]: *Id.* § 601(6).

[^227]: 5 U.S.C. § 601(3). (incorporating by reference the definition of
    "small business concern" in 15 U.S.C. § 632). Pursuant to the RFA,
    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 the 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." 5 U.S.C. § 601(3).

[^228]: Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. § 632 (1996).

[^229]: 5 U.S.C. § 601(4).

[^230]: 1992 Economic Census, U.S. Bureau of the Census, Table 6
    (special tabulation of data under contract to Office of Advocacy of
    the U.S. Small Business Administration).

[^231]: .5 U.S. C. § 601(5).

[^232]: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, "1992 Census of
    Governments."

[^233]: *Id.*

[^234]: An exception is the Direct Broadcast Satellite Service (DBS),
    *infra.*

[^235]: 13 C.F.R. § 120.121, SIC code 4899.

[^236]: *1992 Economic Census Industry and Enterprise Receipts Size
    Report,* Table 2D, SIC code 4899 (U.S. Bureau of the Census data
    under contract to the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business
    Administration).

[^237]: Of course, in retrospect it would have been far easier to
    segment this band sixteen years ago, when the FSS industry first
    requested such a plan. *See* Establishment of Spectrum Utilization
    Policy and Amendment to Commission Rules Regarding Digital
    Termination Systems, 49 Fed. Reg. 37760, ¶ 41 (Sept. 26, 1984)
    (declining to segment the band). Unfortunately, our delay will
    impose costs on all parties.

[^238]: *See* Redevelopment of Spectrum to Encourage Innovation in the
    Use of New Telecommunications Technologies, *First Report and Order
    and Third Notice of Proposed Rulemaking*, 7 FCC Rcd 6886 (1992);
    *Second Report and Order*, 8 FCC Rcd 6495 (1993); *Third Report and
    Order and Memorandum Opinion and Order*, 8 FCC Rcd 6589 (1993);
    *Memorandum Opinion and Order*, 9 FCC Rcd 1943 (1994); *Second
    Memorandum Opinion and Order*, 9 FCC Rcd 7797 (1994); *see also* 47
    C.F.R. §§ 101.67-101.81.

[^239]: *See* *Re: Redesignation of the 17.7-19.7 GHz Frequency Band,
    Blanket Licensing of Satellite Earth Stations in the 17.7-20.2 GHz
    and 27.5-30.0 Frequency Bands, et al.*, IB Docket No. 98-172,
    RM-9005, RM-9118 at ¶¶ 76-84 (rel. June \-- , 2000) (18 GHz Order).

[^240]: *See e.g.*, Rick Brand "Making Way for Wireless Telephones/
    County Radio Frequencies Sold to Sprint Spectrum," Newsday, at A35
    (February 25, 1997) (reporting that Sprint Corporation paid Suffolk
    County, New York a \$4.2 million premium in order to move two of the
    county's microwave radio frequencies earlier than the five-year
    period provided for under the rules. Suffolk County originally
    requested a little more than \$18 million for all five of its
    links).

[^241]: *See* Testimony of Ronald T. LeMay, COO of Sprint Corporation,
    Senate Commerce Committee (March 27, 1996) (arguing that the high
    relocation costs facing new licensees significanty reduces the value
    of new and auctionable spectrum, resulting in the government losing
    between \$930 million and \$1.9 billion in revenues in the next
    round of PCS auctions. LeMay further suggests that "the impact on
    auctions for spectrum that is reallocated in the future could be
    dramatically higher"); *see e.g.*, Letter from Mark Golden, Vice
    President, PCIA to Reed Hundt, Chairman of the FCC, September 22,
    1995 (describing premiums demanded by some incumbents in PCS
    relocation process).

[^242]: In this regard, it is also important that new entrants only be
    required to clear as much spectrum as is necessary to provide their
    service. Only when spectrum-clearing costs are tied to a particular
    service can licensees assess whether it is economical for them to
    proceed with their business plans.

[^243]: *See* 47 C.F.R. §§ 101.67-101.81.

[^244]: *See* 47 C.F.R. §§ 101.69 (c) and 101.75.

[^245]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 101.73.

[^246]: *See* 47 C.F.R. 101.75 (a)(3).

[^247]: In part this is no doubt a function of the long negotiating
    periods: new entrants cannot afford to wait years until the
    involuntary relocation phase to clear out the incumbents.

[^248]: This determination assumes, at least implicitly, that the new
    entrant cannot share with the incumbent service providers.

[^249]: *See* Jan Paul Acton, Stanley M. Besen, Charles River Associates
    Inc., An Economic Analysis of Regulatory Takings and Just
    Compensation with an Application to Mobile Satellite Services (June
    18, 1999) (asserting relocation policy parallels regulatory
    takings); *see e.g.*, *Olson v. United States*, 292 U.S. 246, 255
    (1934) (property holder must be placed "in as good a position
    pecuniarily as if his property had not been taken. He must be made
    whole but is not entitled to more."); *United States v. 564.54 Acres
    of Land*, 99 S.Ct. 1854 (1979) (holding that a property holder
    should recover "the fair market value of its property, rather than
    the cost of substitute facilities."). *See also* Letter from Norman
    P. Levanthal, Counsel for the ICO USA Service Group, to Ms. Magalie
    Roman Salas, Secretary, FCC, ET Docket 95-18 (dated June 21, 1999).

[^250]: *See e.g.*, Amendment to the Commission's Rules Regarding a Plan
    for Sharing the Costs of Microwave Relocation, 11 FCC Rcd 8825, ¶ 32
    (1996) ("...our goal is to ensure that incumbents are no worse off
    than they would be if relocation were not required...").

[^251]: *See* Peter Crampton, Evan Kwerel and John Williams, Efficient
    Relocation of Spectrum Incumbents, Paper presented at the
    Telecommunications Policy Research Conference, Solomons, Maryland,
    at 26 (1996) (on file with authors); Gregory L. Rosston and Jeffrey
    S. Steinberg, Using Market-Based Spectrum Policy To Promote The
    Public Interest, 50 Fed. Comm. L.J. 87, at 93-94 (December 1997).

[^252]: There is little doubt that these valuation questions are quite
    difficult. For an interesting examination of these issues, see
    Crampton, *supra note* 15.

[^253]: The comparability criteria today are hopelessly complex and
    provide little clarity or predictability of outcome. All parties
    would be better served by simpler rules that take into account not
    only reliability, throughput, and operating costs (47 C.F.R. §
    101.75), but also technological neutrality and depreciation. *See
    e.g.*, Letter from Mark Grannis, Counsel for Teledesic Corporation,
    to Commissioner Harold Furchtgott-Roth, Federal Communications
    Commission (dated May 1, 2000) (discussing potential windfall from
    effectively requiring new equipment to replace incumbents older
    equipment). Although simpler rules may be less precise, the
    diminished transaction costs may well result in a net gain for all
    parties concerned. Moreover, these valuation criteria only serve to
    set a floor price for the negotiation period. It should thus be set
    at the minimum value that makes incumbents whole.

[^254]: *See* 18 GHz Order, *supra note* 3, at ¶ 82.

[^255]: *See* Pub. L. 101-552, 104 Stat. 2739 (Nov. 15, 1990),
    reauthorized under Pub. L. 104-320, 110 Stat. 3870 (Oct. 19, 1996).
    (expressing Congressional intent to encourage ADR through federal
    agencies). 5 U.S.C. § 571 et seq. provides the guidelines whereby
    ADR is to take place. See e.g. § 575(a)(1) ("Arbitration may be used
    as an alternative means of dispute resolution whenever all parties
    consent. Consent may be obtained either before or after an issue in
    controversy has arisen"); § 577(a) ("The parties to an arbitration
    proceeding shall be entitled to participate in the selection of the
    arbitrator"); § 579(c)(1) ("The parties to the arbitration are
    entitled to be heard, to present evidence material to the
    controversy, and to cross-examine witnesses appearing at the
    hearing"); § 580(c) ("A final award is binding on the parties to the
    arbitration proceeding, and may be enforced pursuant to sections 9
    through 13 of title 9").

[^256]: *See* Redevelopment of Spectrum to Encourage Innovation in the
    Use of New Technologies, 8 FCC Rcd 6589, ¶ 38 (1993); Use of
    Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedures in Commission Proceedings
    and Proceedings in which the Commission is a Party, 6 FCC Rcd 5669
    (1991) (stating that the Commission encourages the use of ADR in
    proceedings between parties under a Commission rule where the
    Commission is not a party); *see also* 47 C.F.R. § 76.804; 47 C.F.R.
    76.1513(b).

[^257]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 90.699(f)(6).

[^258]: Presumably an incumbent would not chose arbitration, since the
    default outcome is that the incumbent is permitted to maintain its
    facilities.

[^259]: It may be legally required for the Commission to play a role in
    these proceedings. The Office of the Administrative Law Judges may
    provide the needed expertise for any Commission role.