34520 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 140 / Friday, July 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

Dated: July 9, 2018. 

Alexandra Dunn, 

Regional Administrator Region 1. 

[FR Doc. 2018–15628 Filed 7–19–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Parts 2, 25 and 30 

[GN Docket No. 14–177; WT Docket No. 10– 

112; FCC 18–73] 

Use of Spectrum Bands Above 24 GHz 

for Mobile Radio Services 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal 

Communications Commission 

(Commission or FCC) seeks comment on 

proposed service rules to allow flexible 

fixed and mobile uses in additional 

bands and on refinements to the 

adopted rules in this document. A Final 

rule document for the Third Report and 

Order (3rd R&O) related to this 

document for the Third Further Notice 

of Proposed Rulemaking (3rd FNPRM) is 

published in this issue of this Federal 

Register. 

DATES: Comments are due on or before 

September 10, 2018; reply comments are 

due on or before September 28, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by GN Docket No. 14–177, by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Federal Communications 

Commission’s Website: https://

www.fcc.gov/ecfs/. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• People With Disabilities: Contact 

the FCC to request reasonable 

accommodations (accessible format 

documents, sign language interpreters, 

CART, etc.) by email: FCC504@fcc.gov, 

phone: 202–418–0530 or TTY: 202–418– 

0432. 

For detailed instructions for 

submitting comments and additional 

information on the rulemaking process, 

see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section of this document. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Schauble of the Wireless 

Telecommunications Bureau, 

Broadband Division, at (202) 418–0797 

or John.Schauble@fcc.gov, Michael Ha 

of the Office of Engineering and 

Technology, Policy and Rules Division, 

at 202–418–2099 or Michael.Ha@

fcc.gov, or Jose Albuquerque of the 

International Bureau, Satellite Division, 

at 202–418–2288 or Jose.Albuquerque@

fcc.gov. For information regarding the 

PRA information collection 

requirements contained in this PRA, 

contact Cathy Williams, Office of 

Managing Director, at (202) 418–2918 or 

Cathy.Williams@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Commission’s Third 

Report and Order (3rd FNPRM), GN 

Docket No. 14–177, FCC 18–73, adopted 

on June 7, 2018 and released on June 8, 

2018. The complete text of this 

document is available for public 

inspection and copying from 8 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) Monday 

through Thursday or from 8 a.m. to 

11:30 a.m. ET on Fridays in the FCC 

Reference Information Center, 445 12th 

Street SW, Room CY–A257, 

Washington, DC 20554. The complete 

text is available on the Commission’s 

website at http://wireless.fcc.gov, or by 

using the search function on the ECFS 

web page at http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ 

ecfs/. Alternative formats are available 

to persons with disabilities by sending 

an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or by calling 

the Consumer & Governmental Affairs 

Bureau at (202) 418–0530 (voice), (202) 

418–0432 (tty). 

Comment Filing Procedures 

Pursuant to §§ 1.415 and 1.419 of the 

Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 

1.419, interested parties may file 

comments and reply comments on or 

before the dates indicated on the first 

page of this document. Comments may 

be filed using the Commission’s 

Electronic Comment Filing System 

(ECFS). See Electronic Filing of 

Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 

63 FR 24121 (1998). 

• Electronic Filers: Comments may be 

filed electronically using the internet by 

accessing the ECFS: https://

www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filings. Filers should 

follow the instructions provided on the 

website for submitting comments. In 

completing the transmittal screen, filers 

should include their full name, U.S. 

Postal Service mailing address, and the 

applicable docket number, GN Docket 

No. 14–177. 

• Paper Filers: Parties who choose to 

file by paper must file an original and 

one copy of each filing. If more than one 

docket or rulemaking number appears in 

the caption of this proceeding, filers 

must submit two additional copies for 

each additional docket or rulemaking 

number. 

Filings can be sent by hand or 

messenger delivery, by commercial 

overnight courier, or by first-class or 

overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All 

filings must be addressed to the 

Commission’s Secretary, Office of the 

Secretary, Federal Communications 

Commission. 

• All hand-delivered or messengerdelivered paper filings for the 

Commission’s Secretary must be 

delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 

12th St. SW, Room TW–A325, 

Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours 

are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand 

deliveries must be held together with 

rubber bands or fasteners. Any 

envelopes and boxes must be disposed 

of before entering the building. 

• Commercial overnight mail (other 

than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail 

and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050 

Junction Dr., Annapolis Junction, 

Annapolis MD 20701. 

• U.S. Postal Service first-class, 

Express, and Priority mail must be 

addressed to 445 12th Street SW, 

Washington DC 20554. 

People With Disabilities: To request 

materials in accessible formats for 

people with disabilities (Braille, large 

print, electronic files, audio format), 

send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call 

the Consumer & Governmental Affairs 

Bureau at 202–418–0530 (voice), 888– 

835–5322 (tty). 

Ex Parte Rules—Permit-But-Disclose 

Pursuant to § 1.1200(a) of the 

Commission’s rules, this 3rd FNPRM 

shall be treated as a ‘‘permit-butdisclose’’ proceeding in accordance 

with the Commission’s ex parte rules. 

Persons making ex parte presentations 

must file a copy of any written 

presentation or a memorandum 

summarizing any oral presentation 

within two business days after the 

presentation (unless a different deadline 

applicable to the Sunshine period 

applies). Persons making oral ex parte 

presentations are reminded that 

memoranda summarizing the 

presentation must (1) list all persons 

attending or otherwise participating in 

the meeting at which the ex parte 

presentation was made, and (2) 

summarize all data presented and 

arguments made during the 

presentation. If the presentation 

consisted in whole or in part of the 

presentation of data or arguments 

already reflected in the presenter’s 

written comments, memoranda or other 

filings in the proceeding, the presenter 

may provide citations to such data or 

arguments in his or her prior comments, 

memoranda, or other filings (specifying 

the relevant page and/or paragraph 

numbers where such data or arguments 

can be found) in lieu of summarizing 

them in the memorandum. Documents 

shown or given to Commission staff 

during ex parte meetings are deemed to 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 140 / Friday, July 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules 34521 

be written ex parte presentations and 

must be filed consistent with 

§ 1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by 

§ 1.49(f) or for which the Commission 

has made available a method of 

electronic filing, written ex parte 

presentations and memoranda 

summarizing oral ex parte 

presentations, and all attachments 

thereto, must be filed through the 

electronic comment filing system 

available for that proceeding, and must 

be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc, 

.xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf). Participants 

in this proceeding should familiarize 

themselves with the Commission’s ex 

parte rules. 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

As required by the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended 

(RFA), the Commission has prepared 

this present Initial Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the 

possible significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities by 

the policies and rules proposed in the 

attached 3rd FNPRM. Written public 

comments are requested on this IRFA. 

Comments must be identified as 

responses to the IRFA and must be filed 

by the deadlines for comments as 

specified in the 3rd FNPRM. The 

Commission will send a copy of this 3rd 

FNPRM, including this IRFA, to the 

Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration (SBA). In 

addition, the 3rd FNPRM and IRFA (or 

summaries thereof) will be published in 

the Federal Register. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

The 3rd FNPRM contains proposed 

information collection requirements 

subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act 

of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104–13. 

OMB, the general public, and other 

Federal agencies are invited to comment 

on the proposed information collection 

requirements contained in this 

proceeding. In addition, pursuant to the 

Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 

2002, Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(4), the Commission seeks 

specific comment on how it might 

further reduce the information 

collection burden for small business 

concerns with fewer than 25 employees 

Synopsis 

I. 42–42.5 GHz Band 

A. Introduction 

1. The 42–42.5 GHz band (42 GHz 

band) consists of 500 megahertz, 

allocated to non-Federal fixed and 

mobile services on a primary basis, and 

it contains no current Federal allocation 

or service rules. The adjacent 42.5–43.5 

GHz band is allocated to the Radio 

Astronomy Service (RAS) on a primary 

basis for Federal and non-Federal use 

and to the Federal fixed, fixed-satellite 

(Earth-to-space), and mobile except 

aeronautical mobile services on a 

primary basis. The allocations footnote 

corresponding to the 42.5–43.5 GHz 

band also requires that any assignments 

to the stations of other services also 

allocated to the band take all practicable 

steps to protect the RAS from harmful 

interference. Out-of-band signals into 

allocated radio astronomy bands can 

cause interference to radio astronomy 

observations. The Commission also 

notes that radio astronomy as a service 

frequently makes use of observations 

(passive) in bands not allocated to the 

RAS. This practice is a result of 

scientifically valuable signals being 

subject to the Doppler Effect and shifted 

in frequency outside radio astronomyallocated bands. In its 2016 FNPRM, the 

Commission sought comment on a 

proposal to authorize flexible fixed and 

mobile operations in the band under the 

new part 30 Upper Microwave Flexible 

Use Service (UMFUS) rules, but only on 

the condition that adjacent channel RAS 

at 42.5–43.5 GHz could be protected. 

The FNPRM also sought specific 

comment and detailed study on what 

protections should be established for 

this adjacent band—for example, 

whether out-of-band emission limits 

into the 42.5–43.5 GHz band should be 

established or whether it was necessary 

or appropriate to create a guard band 

below 42.5 GHz. In addition to the 

appropriate licensing and technical 

rules, the Commission also sought 

comment on the appropriate band plan 

for the 42 GHz band—including 

whether the band should be licensed as 

a single channel, split into two 

channels, or split into multiple 100 

megahertz channels—and whether to 

license the band geographically using 

Partial Economic Areas (PEAs). 

Although the Commission received 

comment on these various issues, in its 

3rd FNPRM, the Commission seeks 

further comment on several of these 

proposals and issues, in light of recently 

enacted legislation that addresses the 42 

GHz band. 

2. The MOBILE NOW Act, passed as 

part of the RAY BAUM’S Act of 2018 

provides that, within two years of its 

enactment, the Commission shall 

publish an NPRM ‘‘to consider service 

rules to authorize mobile or fixed 

terrestrial wireless operations, including 

for advanced mobile service 

operations,’’ in the 42 GHz band. 

Section 604(b) of the MOBILE NOW Act 

provides that, in conducting this 

rulemaking, the Commission shall: ‘‘(1) 

consider how the band described in 

subsection (a) may be used to provide 

commercial wireless broadband service, 

including whether — (A) such spectrum 

may be best used for licensed or 

unlicensed services, or some 

combination thereof; and (B) to permit 

additional licensed operations in such 

band on a shared basis; and (2) include 

technical characteristics under which 

the band described in subsection (a) 

may be employed for mobile or fixed 

terrestrial wireless operations, including 

any appropriate coexistence 

requirements.’’ Consistent with the 

MOBILE NOW Act, and out of an 

abundance of caution, the Commission 

issues this 3rd FNPRM to seek further 

comment on how the 42 GHz band 

could be used to provide commercial 

wireless broadband service including 

possible opportunities for unlicensed 

and/or shared use of the 42 GHz band. 

B. Suitability for Mobile and Fixed Use 

3. Background. The Commission 

previously proposed to authorize fixed 

and mobile service operations in the 42 

GHz band under the part 30 UMFUS 

rules. In response to the Commission’s 

FNPRM, most commenters generally 

supported establishing service rules that 

would allow the band to be flexibly 

licensed for fixed and mobile operations 

under part 30. Qualcomm and T-Mobile 

argue that flexible use will allow 

individual licensees to shape the nature 

of the services they provide. Intel and 

Samsung argue that authorizing UMFUS 

expansion in the 42 GHz band would 

place it within the ‘tuning range’ of 

radio equipment designed for the 37–40 

GHz bands, accelerating the deployment 

of technology capable of serving these 

bands. CTIA, Ericsson, Intel, and 

Samsung, among others, point to the 

International Telecommunication 

Union’s (ITU) WRC–19 identification of 

the entire 37–42.5 GHz band as a 

candidate to study for mobile services, 

and they argue for similar treatment 

domestically. Commenters supporting 

geographic area licensing explained 

why they believe the alternatives of 

unlicensed or shared licensed use were 

not appropriate. 

4. Various commenters view the 

global harmonization of this band, and 

5G spectrum generally, as an important 

step towards greater manufacturing 

efficiencies and more rapid 

development and deployment of 

services. For example, Samsung notes 

that the Commission has frequently 

highlighted international harmonization 

of spectrum as a key policy goal and 

endorsed its benefits. Commenters 

present different views, however, on the 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
34522 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 140 / Friday, July 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

timing of U.S. action on the band 

relative to ITU action. One commenter 

argues the FCC’s studying bands like 42 

GHz will supplement and advance the 

study efforts of ITU study groups. 

Lockheed Martin, however, opposes 

taking action in bands currently subject 

to ITU study because the Commission 

allegedly has provided no evidence it 

will protect incumbent services in these 

bands or respect the outcome of these 

studies. Alternatively, T-Mobile argues 

the Commission must address domestic 

wireless capacity requirements and 

should not await input from the ITU 

given that the international process can 

be manipulated to delay the designation 

of spectrum for terrestrial use. 

5. Certain FSS operators argue that the 

band should be licensed for satellite 

uses, and they raise arguments similar 

to those raised in petitions for 

reconsideration of the Commission’s 

decision not to allocate the 42 GHz band 

for FSS. FWCC argues the band by itself 

is too narrow for fixed duplex 

operations and that, accordingly, the 42 

GHz band should be combined with the 

adjacent 42.5–43.5 GHz band to create a 

single band with rules for fixed 

operations. The Commission notes that 

although in its R&O, the Commission 

deleted the broadcasting and 

broadcasting-satellite service allocations 

from the 42–42.5 GHz band (42 GHz 

band) and declined to allocate the band 

to the fixed-satellite service (space-toEarth), the Commission again declines 

to reverse those decisions. The 

Commission also declines to revisit its 

decision to deny FWCC’s prior request 

that it establish service rules to enable 

fixed service at 42 GHz under part 101 

of its Rules. 

6. Discussion. The Commission 

tentatively concludes that its part 30 

UMFUS Rules provide the best 

opportunity to provide commercial 

wireless broadband service to the public 

in this band. The ability to use this band 

together with the existing 37 GHz and 

39 GHz bands, the international 

consideration of this band for mobile 

use, and the availability of 500 

megahertz of unassigned spectrum all 

support the Commission’s conclusion 

that this band is suitable for flexible use. 

In view of the extensive support in the 

record, the Commission proposes to 

authorize fixed and mobile licensed 

operations in this band under part 30, 

and the Commission seeks comment on 

this tentative conclusion and on 

alternate proposals. In particular, 

consistent with the MOBILE NOW Act, 

the Commission seeks comment on 

whether unlicensed services should be 

permitted in the band under part 30, or 

whether licensed services, unlicensed 

services, or other types of sharing 

besides unlicensed and licensed should 

be permitted under other rule parts as 

well. Proponents of unlicensed uses or 

sharing in the band between various 

types of operations should provide 

technical studies describing how such 

operations should coexist and share this 

band. 

7. The Commission also seeks to 

refresh the record on the previous 

proposal in the 2016 FNPRM to add 

Federal fixed and mobile allocations in 

this band and a framework under which 

both Federal and non-Federal 

operations could share. Under this 

proposal, the Commission would add a 

Federal allocation to the fixed and 

mobile services on a primary basis for 

Federal use in addition to the current 

non-Federal allocation. 

C. Licensing, Technical, and Service 

Rules 

8. Introduction. In the FNPRM, the 

Commission previously sought 

comment on licensing the 42 GHz band 

under the part 30 UMFUS licensing and 

technical rules. The Commission sought 

comment on whether the 42 GHz band 

should be licensed for exclusive use by 

PEAs, and commenters have generally 

supported this proposal. The FNPRM’s 

proposal contemplated that licensing 

and operations in the 42 GHz band 

would be subject to the part 30 rules 

concerning permissible 

communications, initial authorizations, 

license term, construction requirements, 

partitioning and disaggregation, 

discontinuance of service, equipment 

authorization, power limits, emission 

limits, field strength limits, 

international coordination, RF safety, 

flexible duplexing, and competitive 

bidding procedures. Commenters have 

thus far generally supported applying 

the existing licensing and technical 

rules to the 42 GHz band. The 

Commission will consider those 

comments in resolving those issues, as 

well as additional comments. Further, 

as described below, the Commission 

seeks comment on additional 

considerations regarding protection of 

radio astronomy at 42.5–43.5 GHz, and 

the band plan for the 42 GHz band. 

9. Protecting RAS Services at 42.5– 

43.5 GHz. As noted above, the 

Commission previously proposed to 

authorize flexible mobile and fixed 

operations in the 42 GHz band, as long 

as RAS could be protected in the 

adjacent 42.5–43.5 GHz band, and it 

sought comment on and invited detailed 

study of the forms that such protection 

should take given the location of RAS 

observatories. In response, The National 

Academy of Sciences’ Committee on 

Radio Frequencies (CORF) informed the 

Commission that RAS observations are 

currently made at a limited set 

observatories around the U.S. These 

sites are the GBT in Green Bank, WV, 

the VLA at Soccoro, NM, the Haystack 

Observatory in Westford, MA, and ten 

sites of the Very Long Baseline Array 

(VLBA), noted in the Table of 

Allocations footnote US 131. CORF 

asserted that frequency lines at 42.519, 

42.821, 43.122, and 43.424 GHz are of 

the greatest importance for the detection 

of strong silicon monoxide maser 

emissions from stars and star forming 

regions—important for measuring stellar 

temperature, density, wind velocity and 

other parameters. The 42 GHz band also 

is one of the preferred bands for 

measuring continuum observations. 

Because of the very low signal levels 

being measured, RAS telescopes are 

particularly vulnerable to in-band 

emissions, spurious out-of-band 

emissions, and emissions producing 

harmonics, making protection all the 

more important. CORF stated that the 

detrimental levels for continuum and 

spectral line radio astronomy 

observations for single dishes are ¥227 

dBW/m2/Hz and ¥210 dBW/m2/Hz, 

respectively, for the average across the 

full 1 gigahertz of the 42.5–43.5 GHz 

band and the peak level in any single 

500 kHz channel, as based upon ITU– 

R RA.769, Tables 1 and 2, respectively. 

For observations using the entire VLBA, 

the corresponding limit is ¥175 dBW/ 

m2/Hz. 

10. Proponents of using the 42 GHz 

band for flexible terrestrial wireless use 

generally agree that there are various 

effective means to protect RAS, 

including use of exclusion zones, 

coordination zones, and aggregate 

emissions limits—particularly since 

RAS sites are generally in remote 

locations. No commenter, however, 

provided studies or examples showing 

how these proposed methods would 

work in practice in this particular band. 

T-Mobile suggested that coordination 

with RAS should be required within a 

defined coordination distance. The 

Commission notes that CORF and TMobile agree that the relevant received 

power spectrum density at the RAS 

receiver should be the parameters 

established by ITU–R RA.769. The 

Commission agrees with CORF and TMobile that RAS bands can be protected 

by limiting UMFUS operations near a 

RAS. However, because no one has 

submitted technical studies regarding 

protection of RAS in this band, the 

Commission does not currently have 

sufficient information to propose 

specific rules to protect RAS facilities. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 140 / Friday, July 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules 34523 

1The National Radio Quiet Zone (NRQZ) has 

special protections afforded outside the allocated 

bands requiring coordination. The NRQZ does work 

with mobile radio providers, but coordination is 

required for operation of any mobile radio service 

above 24 GHz in the NRQZ. Also, as with the 

existing coordination requirements for the 37–38 

GHz band, any coordination requirement would 

require licensees to coordinate all operations. 

2The Commission has modified the mobile 

service allocation in the 37–38 GHz band to exclude 

the aeronautical mobile service, i.e., the 37–38 GHz 

band is allocated to the mobile except aeronautical 

mobile service. 

The Commission seeks comment on 

how it can protect RAS facilities in the 

42.5–43.5 GHz band from UMFUS 

operations in 42–42.5 GHz. Should the 

Commission’s rule be based on the ITUR 

RA.769 parameters or are there 

alternative protection criteria? The 

Commission also seeks comment on 

establishing coordination zones around 

the relevant RAS facilities, and on the 

appropriate distance at which 

coordination with RAS should be 

required.1 Interested parties should 

provide detailed technical analysis of 

the coexistence of RAS with terrestrial 

mobile operations that fully supports 

any proposed distance or methodology. 

The Commission also seeks comment on 

other proposals for ensuring protection 

of RAS facilities in the 42.5–43.5 GHz 

band. 

11. Band Plan. In the FNPRM, the 

Commission sought comment on 

whether the band’s 500 megahertz of 

spectrum should be licensed as a single 

channel, split in two, or broken into 

various multiple sizes. In response, 

several commenters noted the value of 

100 megahertz channels as an 

acceptable outcome, particularly in a 

band such as 42 GHz where less 

spectrum is available. The Commission 

proposes to license the 42 GHz band as 

100 megahertz channels because this 

size would be consistent with 

developing industry standards that 

maximize spectral efficiency, all the 

while permitting interested parties to 

aggregate these channels should they 

desire larger bands. The Commission 

seeks comment on this proposal. 

Commenters seeking alternative-e band 

plans should justify why they believe 

other channel sizes would better serve 

future services they envision for this 

band. 

II. 37–37.6 GHz (Lower 37 GHz Band)— 

Licensing Frameworks 

12. Background. The Federal and nonFederal allocations of the 37–38.6 GHz 

Band (37 GHz Band) are as follows: The 

entire 37 GHz band (37–38.6 GHz) is 

allocated to the fixed and mobile 

services on a primary basis for Federal 

and non-Federal use.2 Portions of the 37 

GHz band are also allocated to the Space 

Research Service (SRS) (space-to-Earth) 

on a primary basis for Federal use (37– 

38 GHz) and to the Fixed-Satellite 

Service (FSS) (space-to-Earth) on a 

primary basis for non-Federal use (37.5– 

38.6 GHz). The use of this FSS 

downlink allocation is limited to 

individually licensed earth stations and 

is also subject to other limitations. In 

addition, the 37 GHz band is adjacent to 

the 36–37 GHz band, where passive 

sensors in the Earth exploration satellite 

service (EESS) and SRS are located. 

13. In the R&O, the Commission 

adopted rules to permit fixed and 

mobile terrestrial operation in the 37 

GHz band. The Commission also 

adopted a licensing regime for the 37.6– 

38.6 GHz portion of the band (Upper 37 

GHz Band), which would be licensed in 

five 200 megahertz blocks on a 

geographical area basis, and made the 

Lower 37 GHz band available for 

coordinated co-primary sharing between 

Federal and non-Federal users. The 

Commission identified non-Federal 

users as Shared Access Licensees (SAL) 

and decided that such users would be 

licensed by rule. The Commission 

explained that Federal and non-Federal 

users will access the Lower 37 GHz 

Band through a coordination 

mechanism, which it would develop 

more fully through government/industry 

collaboration. The Commission adopted 

the same technical rules for the Lower 

37 GHz Band and the Upper 37 GHz 

Band. 

14. In the FNPRM, the Commission 

stated that Federal and non-Federal 

fixed and mobile users would access the 

Lower 37 GHz Band by registering 

individual sites through a coordination 

mechanism. The Commission explained 

that the coordination mechanism is the 

regulatory, technical, or procedural tool 

necessary to actually facilitate 

coordinated access, will authorize a 

particular user to use a particular 

bandwidth of spectrum at a particular 

location. The Commission stated that 

the coordination mechanism must; (1) 

be able to obtain information about the 

type of equipment used, the signal 

contour from the coordinated location, 

and the bandwidth requested compared 

with the bandwidth available; (2) be 

capable of regularly updating the status 

of a coordinated location (on/off or 

authorized/unauthorized); and (3) be 

able to incorporate this type of 

information for both Federal and nonFederal fixed and mobile uses. The 

Commission sought comment on the 

coordination mechanism and the 

functions that it should be able to 

perform. The Commission also proposed 

that registered non-Federal sites must be 

put into service within seven days of 

coordination and that registered and 

coordinated sites must reassert their 

registration every seven days. The 

Commission sought comment on: 

Whether a portion of the lower band 

segment should be made available for 

priority access by Federal users, 

whether an enforcement mechanism in 

the lower band segment is necessary to 

help identify and rectify interference 

events, and whether and how to apply 

secondary market rules to the lower 

band segment. 

15. Two commenters, Starry and Intel, 

offer recommendations on the specific 

regulatory, technical, or procedural tool 

necessary to facilitate coordinated 

access in the Lower 37 GHz band. Starry 

proposes site-based registration through 

a third-party coordinator. Under its 

proposal, licensees would file ‘‘specific 

information about each site sufficient 

for a third-party coordinator to conduct 

an interference analysis,’’ including its 

location, height above ground level, 

EIRP, transmitter azimuth, and channel 

size. In addition, ‘‘end points operating 

under the control of a registered 

transmitter’’ would not be registered 

individually, and would instead fall 

under the authorization of the 

transmitter.’’ The third-party 

coordinator would conduct an 

interference analysis under which 

previously registered sites would be 

protected at a modeled receive signal 

strength of ¥79 dBm/10 MHz assuming 

a test antenna at the end points with a 

gain of 25 dBi, at a height of 10 meters 

above ground. Also, under this 

proposal, licensees would be able to 

negotiate alternative sharing 

arrangements and sites would be 

required to be constructed and in 

operation within 120 days after the 

registration is accepted. Under Starry’s 

proposal, there would be clear penalties 

for registering unused sites. Starry also 

offers additional ideas for an enhanced 

sharing framework that could be 

implemented over time. No party 

responded to Starry’s proposal. Intel’s 

proposal would use a database similar 

to the database used for the 70 GHz and 

80 GHz bands, except that the database 

would also play a role in frequency 

coordination. 

16. Discussion. The Commission 

concludes that it is appropriate to 

further develop the record regarding the 

coordination mechanism that it would 

expect to use, as between either two or 

more non-Federal entities or between 

Federal and non-Federal entities. In 

order to facilitate shared use of the 

Lower 37 GHz band between Federal 

and non-Federal users, as well as among 

non-Federal users, the Commission 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
34524 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 140 / Friday, July 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

seeks comment on a proposed 

coordination mechanism and 

alternatives, as set forth below. The 

Commission anticipates that a sharing 

mechanism would facilitate quick 

access to spectrum without 

unreasonable processing delays and a 

predictable path for future coordination 

in the band among stakeholders. The 

Commission recognizes the importance 

of the Lower 37 GHz band to future 

Federal operations, and it will work in 

partnership with NTIA, DoD, and other 

Federal agencies to develop a sharing 

approach that allows for robust Federal 

and non-Federal use in this band. 

17. In designing a licensing 

mechanism for the Lower 37 GHz Band, 

the Commission seeks to accommodate 

a variety of use cases that may develop 

for this band—in essence, the 

Commission envisions Lower 37 GHz as 

an innovation band in the mmW 

spectrum. In particular, the Commission 

anticipates that there will be at least 

four types of non-Federal deployments 

in the Lower 37 GHz Band: Point-topoint links (for example backhaul and 

backbone links); fixed wireless 

broadband systems (generally consisting 

of a fixed access point and fixed 

subscriber units); single base station 

IoT-type systems (for example, in a 

factory); and carrier-based deployments 

of mobile systems using the Lower 37 

GHz Band as supplemental capacity tied 

to other bands that are licensed on a 

geographic area basis. The Commission 

seeks comment on whether there are 

additional types of deployments 

contemplated for this band. If so, what 

would those additional uses be, and 

how would they affect the licensing of 

the Lower 37 GHz Band? 

18. As detailed above, Starry proposes 

a model in which proposed facilities 

would be registered with a third-party 

coordinator. Another possible model, 

under which the Commission would 

issue licenses authorizing operations, 

would be the coordination model used 

in part 101 point-to-point bands. In 

order to complete frequency 

coordination, an applicant must give 

prior notice to nearby licensees and 

other applicants for licenses of the 

proposed applicant’s operations, make 

reasonable efforts to avoid interference 

and resolve conflicts, and certify to the 

Commission that the proposed 

operation has been coordinated. Once 

the applicant has completed frequency 

coordination, the applicant must file an 

application for authorization with the 

Commission, specifying the latitude and 

longitude of the transmitter to be used 

to an accuracy of one second. The 

applicant must coordinate each 

operation, including any change in the 

location of the transmitter of more than 

five seconds in latitude or longitude or 

both, and must apply for a modification 

of their license. Similarly, if the 

applicant later seeks to deploy 

additional transmitters, the 

Commission’s part 101 rules require 

coordination of those facilities and the 

applicant must apply for modification of 

the license. The Commission seeks 

comment on the relative merits of using 

these coordination models in the Lower 

37 GHz band. The Commission also 

seeks comment on the criteria that it 

should use to determine whether 

predicted interference would be 

harmful. If actual harmful interference 

occurs after successful coordination, 

how should the interference be 

resolved? How will future Federal 

operations be accommodated in the 

sharing framework and what parameters 

will be used to develop a trigger for 

required coordination? Given that the 

Commission is proposing construction 

requirements for non-Federal licensees 

in this band, as discussed below, the 

Commission seeks comment on how 

best to enforce those requirements in an 

environment where registrations are not 

filed with the Commission. 

19. For the four types of deployments, 

the Commission seeks comment on a 

first-come-first-served licensing or 

registration scheme, in which actual 

users have a right to interference 

protection, but no right to exclude other 

users. The Commission seeks comment 

on subsequent users being required to 

coordinate with previously registered 

non-Federal and Federal sites through 

part 101 notice and response rules or on 

the alternative of registering facilities 

with a third-party coordinator. 

20. With regard to Federal sites, the 

Commission proposes to require nonFederal users to work with Federal users 

in good faith to coordinate any new 

system Federal users may seek to 

deploy. The Commission anticipates 

that non-Federal users would not be 

required to agree to coordination 

requests that would carry a significant 

risk of harmful interference. The 

Commission seeks comment on the 

criteria that it should use to determine 

whether interference is harmful. Is the 

coordination trigger that Starry proposes 

appropriate, or should the Commission 

use an alternative set of criteria? The 

Commission seeks comment on the best 

means of coordinating with Federal 

operations. The Commission intends to 

adopt as part of the rules a coordination 

methodology that will facilitate 

coordination for the kinds of cases that 

it anticipates may be typical. This will 

allow us to test the assumption that any 

coordination zone typically ‘‘can be 

measured in meters rather than 

kilometers.’’ To do so, the Commission 

will work with NTIA, on behalf of 

Federal users, and with industry to 

identify those cases. DoD has expressed 

an interest in a possible aeronautical 

allocation in the Lower 37 GHz band, so 

the Commission anticipates including 

aeronautical cases in its consideration of 

coordination methodologies. 

21. The Commission expects the 

identification and analysis of these 

cases to be a critical component to its 

understanding of the extent that the 

band can be shared dynamically. 

Commenters should address how to 

prevent ‘‘warehousing,’’ whereby a 

licensee preserves its rights without 

providing actual service. Should 

licensees receive any protection before 

they have completed construction and 

begun operations? How should 

‘‘operation’’ be defined and how can the 

Commission plan to monitor 

compliance, including whether 

operations have been discontinued? 

Should the Commission put limits on 

the aggregate area, or amount of 

spectrum, that any one licensee or its 

affiliates can protect? These issues are 

critical to establishing the co-primary 

sharing rights that the Commission 

envisions for this band. 

22. To the extent that the solution to 

preserving Federal entity’s options may 

be to reserve a part of the band for their 

priority use, the Commission seeks 

comment on how to define such priority 

rights. Are there geographic areas where 

such priority rights would have little or 

no adverse impact on non-Federal 

operations and, if so, what should be the 

process for identifying those areas? The 

Commission seeks comment on 

alternative approaches that can be used 

to ensure Federal and non-Federal users 

will have access to the band to meet 

their needs. 

23. Below, the Commission seeks 

comment on whether offering three 

types of non-Federal licenses—point-topoint licenses; base stations licenses; 

and site-cluster licenses—would 

facilitate deployment in the Lower 37 

GHz band. 

24. Point-to-point licenses. The 

Commission seeks comment on 

requiring individual point-to-point links 

to be coordinated with previously 

licensed or registered sites using part 

101 notice and response rules. If it is 

determined that the proposed link 

would not interfere or could be 

modified not to interfere with 

previously licensed or registered sites, 

then a license would be issued for the 

specific point-to-point link in the 

Commission’s Universal Licensing 

System (ULS) to establish future 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 140 / Friday, July 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules 34525 

interference protection rights. A pointto-point licensee would be required to 

construct its sites within 18 months 

from the date the site was registered. If 

the licensee fails to construct these sites 

within the 18 months, the licensee 

might be prohibited from reapplying for 

that specific link for 12 months. The 

Commission seeks comment on this 

approach, as well as alternatives. Are 

there other methods that would 

facilitate licensing of point-to-point 

links? The Commission also seeks 

comment on whether it should require 

licensees to file individual construction 

notices in order to facilitate enforcement 

of construction obligations. The 

Commission seeks comment on the 

relative costs and benefits of this 

licensing mechanism. 

25. Base station licenses. The 

Commission seeks comment on 

permitting an applicant to select a point 

around which it would get a license for 

a specific site with either a 360 degree 

radius or a defined sector of a 360 

degree radius. This license also would 

authorize any customer premises 

equipment (such as equipment used for 

point-to-multipoint networks) or mobile 

devices operating in conjunction with 

the licensed base station. The licensee 

would receive interference protection 

for a certain specified distance, for 

example one kilometer, that would then 

be a protection zone. The Commission 

proposes to require that individual base 

stations be coordinated with previously 

licensed or registered sites using part 

101 notice and response rules. If it is 

determined that the proposed base 

station license would not interfere or 

could be modified to not interfere with 

a previously licensed or registered site, 

then a license would be issued in ULS 

to establish future interference 

protection rights. Under this licensing 

scheme, a subsequent licensee would 

not be precluded from licensing either 

a point-to-point link or a base station, or 

from registering a facility under a sitecluster license (discussed below) within 

a previously established protection 

zone, as long as it can be coordinated 

successfully with any previously 

licensed or registered facilities. The 

Commission proposes to require that a 

base station licensee must construct its 

site within 18 months from the date the 

site was licensed. If the licensee fails to 

construct its site within the 18 months, 

the Commission proposes that the 

licensee be prohibited from reapplying 

for a base station license covering any 

portion of the same area for 12 months. 

The Commission seeks comment on this 

approach, as well as alternatives 

commenters might propose. Are there 

other means or requirements that would 

facilitate licensing of these types of 

deployments? The Commission seeks 

comment on whether it should require 

licensees to file individual construction 

notices. If so, should these construction 

notices be filed with the Commission or 

with a third-party database 

administrator? The Commission seeks 

comment on the relative costs and 

benefits of this licensing mechanism. 

26. Site-cluster licenses. The 

Commission recognizes that operators 

proposing 5G deployments may have 

difficulties determining the precise 

locations of their facilities, particularly 

in instances where they are deploying a 

large number of facilities. Requiring 

licensees to identify specific locations, 

file applications for each individual 

facility, and then wait 30 days for each 

application to undergo the mandatory 

public notice period may not promote 

efficient deployment of 5G services. 

Accordingly, the Commission seeks 

comment on the use of a novel concept 

to address this issue: The site-cluster 

license. Under a site-cluster license, 

instead of licensing individual base 

stations or point-to-point links, the 

applicant would license a larger (e.g., 5 

km) non-exclusive point-radius license 

within which it could register 

individual base stations and/or point-topoint links. Much like the licensing 

paradigm for the 70–80 GHz band, a 

non-exclusive point and radius license 

would not authorize operation, but 

rather would authorize the licensee to 

register individual base stations and/or 

point-to-point links within its nonexclusive site cluster area. A site-cluster 

licensee would not have the right to 

preclude facilities proposed by other 

licensees. To receive interference 

protection for specific facilities within 

the site-cluster, the applicant would 

have to coordinate those facilities with 

other Federal and non-Federal Lower 37 

GHz licensees (point-to-point, base 

station, or site-cluster) within the radius 

of its site cluster area, and register each 

specific facility. First-in-time rights 

would be triggered only for those 

facilities that are successfully registered. 

The Commission proposes that 

applicants for site-cluster licenses 

would file in ULS and would be issued 

a non-exclusive site-cluster license for a 

specific radius. Should individual base 

stations or point-to-point links 

registered under the umbrella of the site 

cluster license be registered either in 

ULS or, alternatively in a third-party 

database? The Commission seeks 

comment on the relative costs and 

benefits of either approach. Is this 

concept an effective means of 

facilitating large deployments? 

27. The Commission seeks comment 

on two buildout requirements for sitecluster licenses. First, a buildout period 

by which an applicant with a sitecluster license must register and 

construct a minimum of one specific 

facility within its site cluster area. 

Second, a buildout period for each 

specific site that the applicant registers, 

which would require the applicant to 

build that site within a specified period 

after registration. The Commission seeks 

comment on what those buildout 

periods should be. The Commission 

proposes that failure to meet its 

buildout requirement would preclude 

the applicant from reapplying for a nonexclusive license in that area for a 

certain period. The Commission seeks 

comment on what that period of time 

should be. The Commission also seeks 

comment on whether it should require 

licensees to file individual construction 

notices. If so, should these construction 

notices be filed with the Commission or 

with a third-party database 

administrator? The Commission also 

seeks comment on alternative means of 

enforcing construction requirements. As 

mentioned above, the Commission seeks 

comment on what rights a registrant 

should have before it actually constructs 

its facility and begins operations. 

III. 37.0–38.6 GHz (37 GHz Band) 

28. With regard to Federal co-primary 

access to the 37 GHz band, the R&O 

adopted rules that establish the 

coordination zones for the 14 military 

sites and three scientific sites identified 

by NTIA, and noted the ability for 

Federal agencies to add future sites on 

a coordinated basis. The Commission 

seeks comment on how best to 

accommodate coordination zones for 

future Federal operations at a limited 

number of additional sites. For instance, 

should the Commission supplement 

§ 30.205 to add more specific sites for 

Federal operations, or should it 

establish a process that would permit 

Federal entities in the future to identify 

a limited number of additional sites on 

an as-needed basis? The Commission 

also seeks comment on whether the 

coordination zones previously 

established in § 30.205 might be 

reduced to better accommodate nearby 

non-Federal operations without 

adversely impacting Federal operations 

at those sites. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
34526 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 140 / Friday, July 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

IV. 25.25–27.5 GHz Band (26 GHz 

Band) 

A. Suitability for Mobile Use 

29. Background. In this proceeding, 

the Commission has authorized mobile 

services in the 700 megahertz of 

spectrum in the 24 GHz band and 850 

megahertz of spectrum in the 28 GHz 

band). In the U.S., the 25.25–27.5 GHz 

(‘‘26 GHz’’) band is allocated primarily 

for Federal government services, but 

Commenters in this proceeding note 

that there is a growing international 

consensus that terrestrial mobile 

services should be authorized in the 

broader 24.25–27.5 GHz band. This year 

the European Conference of Postal and 

Telecommunications Administrations 

(CEPT) has adopted a preliminary 

determination to make the 24.25–27.5 

GHz band a ‘‘clear priority’’ for 

harmonization of 5G services 

throughout Europe and to promote it for 

worldwide harmonization at WRC–19. 

In addition, at least eight countries in 

other parts of the world are also 

preparing to authorize terrestrial mobile 

services in that range. In February, 2018, 

ITU–R Task Group 5/1 issued a set of 

preliminary technical analyses 

concluding that the band can be shared 

among terrestrial mobile and incumbent 

services. Most of the contributors 

represented national governments, 

including the U.S. 

30. Discussion. As noted above, in 

regional and international forums 

leading to the World 

Radiocommunication Conference 2019 

(WRC–19), the frequency range from 

24.25–27.5 GHz has emerged as the 

leading candidate for 5G services, 

referred to in ITU parlance as 

‘‘International Mobile 

Telecommunication 2020’’ (IMT–2020). 

The international momentum presents 

the Commission with an opportunity to 

consider whether the 26 GHz band 

would be suitable for flexible fixed and 

mobile use. The Commission notes that 

in the U.S., the 25.25–27.5 GHz (‘‘26 

GHz’’) band is allocated primarily for 

Federal government services. 

31. Equipment manufacturers indicate 

that they can readily integrate the 26 

GHz band into a tuning range that 

includes two bands that the United 

States has already authorized for mobile 

services, the 24 GHz band (24.25–24.45 

GHz and 24.75–25.25 GHz) and the 28 

GHz band (27.5–28.35 GHz). That 

presents three opportunities—first, to 

achieve manufacturing economies by 

covering several bands with a single 

radio; second, to provide international 

roaming capability in affordable user 

devices, and third, to accelerate the 

availability of equipment in newly 

authorized bands that share a tuning 

range with early-deployed bands. Some 

commenters also contend that the 26 

GHz band has better coverage 

characteristics than other bands that 

might potentially be available at higher 

frequencies. 

32. The Commission will continue to 

actively support the 24 GHz and 28 GHz 

bands. At the same time, the 

Commission believes the 26 GHz band 

could be suitable for flexible fixed and 

mobile use. It is relatively near to the 24 

GHz and 28 GHz bands, which the 

Commission has already found suitable 

for fixed and mobile use. The amount of 

spectrum potentially available (over two 

gigahertz) could make this band a useful 

addition to UMFUS. The Commission 

recognizes that it would need to work 

out suitable sharing or protection 

arrangements with Federal incumbents 

in the band. Accordingly, the 

Commission seeks comment on whether 

the 26 GHz band could be made 

available for non-Federal fixed and 

mobile use. 

B. Spectrum Sharing and Compatibility 

33. Existing allocations for the 26 GHz 

band in this country are mostly Federal. 

While Federal use of the 26 GHz band 

to this point has been fairly limited, the 

Commission recognizes that Federal 

agencies may aspire to make heavier use 

of that band in the future. Any 

exploration of private sector 

opportunities in the band must therefore 

address the potential for spectrum 

sharing and compatibility among 

diverse participants. 

1. Protection of Incumbents 

34. Background. The Federal 

allocations for the 25.25–27.5 GHz 

bands in this country generally follow 

the ITU’s international allocations. In 

the Federal column of the U.S. Table of 

Allocations, the entire 25.25–27.5 GHz 

band has primary allocations for Fixed 

(FS), Mobile (MS), and Inter-Satellite 

(ISS) services, with Inter-Satellite 

limited to space research and Earth 

exploration-satellite applications, along 

with transmissions of data originating 

from industrial and medical activities in 

space. The 25.5–27 GHz band has a 

primary allocation for both Federal and 

non-Federal Space Research service 

(SRS) (space-to-Earth), with non-Federal 

Earth exploration-satellite service 

(EESS) subject to case-by-case 

electromagnetic compatibility analysis. 

35. Consistent with the international 

community’s focus on making the 

24.25–27.5 GHz band available for 

terrestrial mobile services, a.k.a. IMT, 

ITU–R’s Study Group 5 Task Group 

5/1 (TG 5/1) has been conducting 

extensive studies to evaluate the 

potential for sharing and compatibility 

in that range between mobile and EESS, 

SRS, FS, FSS, and ISS. As directed by 

WRC–15 Resolution 238, TG 5/1 has 

focused on ensuring the protection of 

EESS and SRS earth stations operating 

in the 25.5–27 GHz band segment. The 

U.S. contribution to the EESS/SRS 

Study found that the coordination 

distances necessary to prevent IMT from 

causing interference is 52 km for SRS 

and 7 km for EESS. 

36. Discussion. The Commission seeks 

comment on the best ways to protect 

existing incumbent operations and 

systems that Federal agencies might 

choose to deploy in the future, 

including identifying appropriate 

separation distances. The Commission 

invites comment on steps it could take 

to facilitate sharing now and in the 

future. For example, should the 

Commission give priority to Federal 

operations at certain locations such as 

military bases and test ranges? 

Alternatively, can the Commission 

strike an appropriate balance by 

ensuring deployment of Federal 

operations provided they do not affect 

more than a certain amount of 

population? Or might the Commission 

provide priority to non-Federal 

operations in a certain number of 

markets, with priority to Federal 

operations elsewhere? To what extent 

would it be possible to develop 

coordination mechanisms between 

licensees and Federal operations? 

37. The Commission notes that the 

United States and other governments 

have submitted detailed sharing and 

compatibility studies for a frequency 

range that includes the 26 GHz band, 

which are being evaluated by that 

group. In general, it appears that 

protection zones around existing EESS 

and SRS earth stations would affect only 

small percentages of the overall U.S. 

population, though their impact on 

specific localities could be significant 

for the affected populations. The 

protection radiuses being considered by 

TG 5/1 are generally intended to serve 

only as triggers to begin a coordination 

process. The final definitions of 

exclusion zones around particular earth 

stations will need to take into account 

a variety of local factors, including 

terrain, clutter, and network design 

features that could mitigate the effect of 

IMT deployment inside coordination 

zones. The Commission also seeks 

comment on the best means of 

protecting existing fixed links in the 

band. The Commission notes that there 

are well-established protocols for 

coordinating Federal and non-Federal 

point-to-point services. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 140 / Friday, July 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules 34527 

3On May 31, 2018, Elefante filed a petition for 

rulemaking to establish the Stratospheric-Based 

Communications Services (SBCS). This petition is 

pending, and the Commission has not initiated the 

requested rulemaking proceeding at this time. The 

Commission sees no basis for deferring initial 

consideration of flexible fixed and mobile use of the 

26 GHz band, as Elefante requests. 

38. The 26 GHz band currently has 

Federal fixed and mobile allocations in 

addition to the EESS, ISS, and SRS 

allocations. While Federal use of the 26 

GHz band appears to be fairly limited to 

this point, the Commission recognizes 

that Federal agencies may be 

considering various potential uses for 

this spectrum in the future. It is difficult 

to predict what those services might be, 

their characteristics, and where they 

may be deployed. Nevertheless, the 

Commission believes that the nature of 

the technology apt to be used in this 

region of the spectrum is likely to 

enable sharing using such techniques as 

geographic separation, highly 

directional antennas, and taking 

advantage of the relatively high path 

losses to enable operation in close 

proximity. This should make sharing 

between Federal and non-Federal 

systems easier than it has been at lower 

frequencies. Nevertheless, sharing the 

26 GHz band between Federal and nonFederal systems will still require a 

carefully developed framework. The 

Commission intends to work closely 

with NTIA to enable UMFUS use of the 

26 GHz band while preserving the 

ability of Federal users to develop and 

deploy new technologies and services in 

the 26 GHz band. The Commission 

intends to explore a number of different 

approaches for sharing the band. For 

example, this may involve sharing the 

band using a framework similar to what 

the Commission is proposing for the 

lower 37 GHz band. Alternately, the 

Commission may set aside portions of 

the 26 GHz band for exclusively Federal 

use while making other portions 

available exclusively for non-Federal 

use. The Commission may limit nonFederal use of the band to certain 

geographic areas while reserving use of 

the band in other areas for Federal use. 

The Commission request comments on 

various approaches to sharing the 26 

GHz band between UMFUS licensees 

and both existing and future Federal 

operations. 

2. Spectrum Sharing and Compatibility 

With Other New Services 

39. Background. Elefante proposes to 

deploy what it calls ‘‘persistent 

stratospheric-based communications 

infrastructure’’ at altitudes below 20 km 

in the 26 GHz band, and it says that ITU 

study groups are conducting studies for 

stations that would operate at altitudes 

between 20 and 50 km. Having analyzed 

the band with Lockheed Martin, 

Elefante concludes that spectrum 

sharing between unaffiliated mobile 

deployments and persistent 

stratospheric communications systems 

may not be possible absent an extremely 

high degree of dynamic coordination 

and information sharing. On that basis, 

Elefante recommends that UMFUS not 

be authorized in the 26 GHz band. 

40. Discussion. Where a high-altitude 

platform stations (HAPS) or Elefantestyle platform is deployed above the 

center of an urban area, ground stations 

in the urban core would presumably 

communicate with the airborne station 

at relatively high elevation angles, 

which would allow shorter separation 

distances from terrestrial mobile 

equipment. By contrast, ground stations 

in the periphery of the urban area would 

likely require lower elevation angles to 

communicate with the airborne platform 

and would therefore require larger 

separation distances. A HAPS operator 

or Elefante might also choose to deploy 

some of their airborne platforms away 

from urban cores, which would enable 

some ground stations in exurban or 

rural areas to communicate at high 

elevation angles and with limited 

separation from terrestrial systems. 

41. In light of the above, the 

Commission invites comment on 

Elefante’s conclusion that spectrum 

sharing between airborne platform 

services (i.e., both HAPS and systems 

such as Elefante’s that would operate at 

lower altitudes) and unaffiliated 

UMFUS operators would be infeasible, 

and that UMFUS should therefore not 

be authorized in the 26 GHz band.3

Alternatively, the Commission inquires 

whether it should prohibit airborne 

platform systems in the band, or 

authorize airborne platform services 

only if they are affiliated with UMFUS 

licensees. The Commission also invites 

comment on any additional spectrumsharing techniques that might reduce 

the required separation distances 

between UMFUS equipment and ground 

stations communicating with airborne 

platforms. Finally, the Commission 

invites comment on any other new or 

proposed services, Federal or nonFederal, that should be given priority 

over UMFUS in the band or, 

alternatively, would be compatible with 

UMFUS and with incumbent services. 

C. Licensing the 26 GHz Band 

42. Background. In the R&O, the 

Commission noted that in recent years 

it has sought greater consistency in its 

approach to geographic license area 

sizes in order to help providers 

aggregate licenses in a more targeted 

and efficient manner, and that it has 

gravitated toward license areas that are 

derived from Economic Area (EA) units. 

Because Partial Economic Areas (PEAs) 

nest into EAs but can also be broken 

down into counties, the Commission 

found that choosing them would strike 

the right balance by facilitating access to 

spectrum by large and small providers, 

simplifying frequency coordination, and 

incentivizing investment. By contrast, 

the Commission decided to license the 

28 GHz band by counties, primarily 

because the band was already licensed 

by Basic Trading Areas (BTAs), which 

could not readily be reformed into 

either EAs or PEAs. In the Second 

Report and Order, the Commission 

selected PEAs as the geographic unit for 

UMFUS licenses in two other bands, the 

24 GHz and 47 GHz. 

43. Discussion. The Commission seeks 

comment on using geographic area 

licensing and adopting PEAs as the 

geographic license area size for UMFUS 

licenses in the 26 GHz band. The 

Commission also seeks comment on 

site-based licensing, as well as other 

licensing mechanisms. Geographic area 

licensing may provide licensees with 

the flexibility to provide a variety of 

services, and will foster innovation and 

investment and thereby spur 

deployment. Will geographic area 

licensing facilitate coexistence between 

Federal and non-Federal uses? If the 

Commission decides to use geographic 

area licensing, PEAs also appear to 

provide a balance between the larger 

areas that can encourage more 

investment, and the smaller areas that 

can more efficiently accommodate 

mmW propagation characteristics. To 

the extent licensees are interested in 

smaller areas, partitioning is an 

available option. Commenters favoring 

site-based licensing or other licensing 

methods should set forth specific 

proposals for licensing the 26 GHz band. 

Given the amount of spectrum available, 

should the Commission consider using 

different licensing approaches in 

different parts of the band? 

D. Band Plan 

44. Background. In the Second Report 

and Order, the Commission 

acknowledged that most millimeterwave mobile design work is being built 

around 100-megahertz building blocks. 

It chose to license the 700 megahertz in 

the 24 GHz band as seven 100- 

megahertz channels and to license the 

1,000 megahertz in the 47.2–48.2 GHz 

band as five 200-megahertz channels. In 

the R&O, the Commission decided to 

issue new licenses for the 28 GHz band 

in two 450-megahertz blocks, and it 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
34528 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 140 / Friday, July 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

divided the 39 GHz band into seven 

200-megahertz channels. 

45. Discussion. If carriers will 

eventually require 200 megahertz 

bandwidths to meet their customers’ 

needs, the Commission recognizes that 

the necessity of combining smaller 

channels to achieve the requisite scale 

could involve transaction costs that 

might eventually be passed on to 

consumers. On the other hand, 100 

megahertz channels would increase the 

opportunity for competitive entry into 

the band and provide flexibility for uses 

that might require less spectrum. With 

those countervailing considerations in 

mind, the Commission seeks comment 

on adopting channel bandwidths of 100 

megahertz or, in the alternative, 200 

megahertz for the 26 GHz band. 

V. 50.4–51.4 GHz Band 

46. Background. The 50.4–51.4 GHz 

band includes primary Federal and nonFederal allocations for fixed and mobile 

services, as well as primary Federal and 

non-Federal allocations for fixedsatellite (Earth-to-space) and mobile 

satellite (Earth-to-space) services. In 

1998, in the V-Band First Report and 

Order, the Commission designated the 

50.4–51.4 GHz band for use by wireless 

(fixed and mobile) services. In the 

FNPRM in the Spectrum Frontiers 

proceeding, the Commission proposed 

to authorize fixed and mobile operations 

throughout the 50.4–52.6 GHz band in 

accordance with the part 30 UMFUS 

rules. The Commission also proposed to 

use geographic area licensing to license 

UMFUS stations on a PEA basis and 

sought comment on sharing with 

satellite services. The Commission has 

received eight satellite applications or 

market access requests and twenty earth 

station applications seeking to use the 

existing FSS (Earth-to-space) allocation 

in the 50.4–51.4 GHz band for delivery 

of broadband services. 

47. In response to the FNPRM, certain 

satellite companies request that the 

Commission designate satellite services 

in the 50.4–52.4 GHz band currently 

allocated to FSS. Echostar supports 

preserving the co-primary status of FSS 

and terrestrial fixed/mobile services in 

the 50.4–52.4 GHz band and 

recommends adopting spectrum sharing 

rules that recognize likely deployment 

scenarios by the different services. CTIA 

asserts that any technical requirements 

should be equivalent to the 

Commission’s part 30 rules for other 

shared bands. To the extent the 

Commission decides to adopt a sharing 

framework in the band, Viasat urges the 

Commission to consider broader and 

more balanced sharing between the 

services on a true co-primary basis at 

50.4–52.4 GHz instead of imposing the 

‘‘three earth stations per license area’’ 

framework adopted for the 28 GHz 

Band. 

48. Discussion. Although the 50.4– 

52.6 GHz band remains under 

consideration for UMFUS licensing, the 

Commission has throughout this 

proceeding sought to promote spectrum 

efficiency by permitting spectrum made 

available for UMFUS to be shared with 

other allocated services when possible. 

As in the case of other bands shared 

between co-primary terrestrial and 

fixed-satellite services, (e.g., 24.75– 

25.25 GHz, 37.5–40 GHz and 47.2–48.2 

GHz), the Commission believes that in 

the 50.4–51.4 GHz band, where an FSS 

allocation already exists, that a limited 

number of individually licensed FSS 

earth stations can share the 50.4–51.4 

GHz band with minimal impact on 

terrestrial operations. Therefore, the 

Commission proposes to adopt rules 

permitting licensing of individual FSS 

earth stations in the 50.4–51.4 GHz band 

using the criteria identical to those 

applicable in the 24.75–25.25 GHz band. 

Specifically, the Commission proposes 

to apply the permitted aggregate 

population limits within the specified 

earth station PFD contour on a percounty basis, similar to the requirement 

in the 27.5–28.35 GHz band. 

Additionally, as in the 47.2–48.2 GHz 

band, the Commission proposes to 

adopt constraints on the number of 

permitted earth stations, not only per 

county, but also per PEA in which the 

earth stations are located. To reflect 

these requirements, the Commission 

proposes to modify § 25.136(g) of the 

Commission’s rules to include the 50.4– 

51.4 GHz band. The Commission also 

proposes to amend footnote NG65 to the 

U.S. Table to include the 50.4–51.4 GHz 

band, making clear the relative 

interference protection obligations 

between the co-primary services. The 

Commission seeks comment on these 

proposals. 

VI. Mobile Spectrum Holdings Policies 

in the 26 GHz and 42 GHz Bands 

49. In this 3rd R&O, the Commission 

adopted its proposal to eliminate the 

pre-auction limit for the R&O bands, 

finding that entities bidding for licenses 

in the 24 GHz, 28 GHz, 37 GHz, 39 GHz, 

and 47 GHz bands will not be subject to 

bright-line, pre-auction limits on the 

amount of spectrum they may acquire at 

an auction of these bands. Similarly, to 

the extent that the Commission adopts 

UMFUS rules for some portion or all of 

the 26 GHz and 42 GHz bands, it 

proposes to have no pre-auction limit on 

the amount of spectrum in these bands 

(or portions thereof) that an entity may 

acquire through competitive bidding. 

The Commission believes that the 

reasons for eliminating the pre-auction 

limit for these five bands would apply 

equally to the 26 GHz and 42 GHz 

bands, given their technical 

characteristics relative to these other 

bands. The Commission seeks comment 

on this proposal. 

50. To the extent that the Commission 

adopts UMFUS rules for some portion 

or all of the 26 GHz and 42 GHz bands, 

it proposes to include those bands (or 

portions thereof) in the mmW spectrum 

threshold for reviewing proposed 

secondary market transactions. The 

Commission notes that these bands 

share similar technical characteristics to 

the 24 GHz, 28 GHz, 37 GHz, 39 GHz, 

and 47 GHz bands. The Commission 

seeks comment on this proposal. 

VII. Initial Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis 

51. As required by the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended 

(RFA), the Commission has prepared 

this present Initial Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the 

possible significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities by 

the policies and rules proposed in the 

attached 3rd FNPRM. Written public 

comments are requested on this IRFA. 

Comments must be identified as 

responses to the IRFA and must be filed 

by the deadlines for comments as 

specified in the 3rd FNPRM. The 

Commission will send a copy of this 3rd 

FNPRM, including this IRFA, to the 

Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration (SBA). In 

addition, the 3rd FNPRM and IRFA (or 

summaries thereof) will be published in 

the Federal Register. 

A. Need for, and Objectives of, the 

Proposed Rules 

52. In the 3rd FNPRM, the 

Commission proposes to increase the 

Nation’s supply of spectrum for mobile 

broadband by adopting rules for fixed 

and mobile services in the 25.25–27.5 

GHz and 42–42.5 GHz band. The 

Commission proposes to include this 

band in the part 30 UMFUS. This 

additional spectrum for mobile use will 

help ensure that the speed, capacity, 

and ubiquity of the nation’s wireless 

networks keeps pace with the 

skyrocketing demand for mobile service. 

It will also make possible new types of 

services for consumers and businesses. 

The Commission proposes to award 

Partial Economic Area-based licenses 

for these bands to best balance the needs 

of large and small carriers. The 3rd 

FNPRM also proposes to include these 

bands, or portions of these bands, in the 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 140 / Friday, July 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules 34529 

mmW spectrum threshold for reviewing 

proposed secondary market 

transactions. 

53. Until recently, the mmW bands 

were generally considered unsuitable 

for mobile applications because of 

propagation losses at such high 

frequencies and the inability of mmW 

signals to propagate around obstacles. 

As increasing congestion has begun to 

fill the lower bands and carriers have 

resorted to smaller and smaller 

microcells in order to re-use the 

available spectrum, however, the 

industry is taking another look at the 

mmW bands and beginning to realize 

that at least some of its presumed 

disadvantages can be turned to 

advantage. For example, short 

transmission paths and high 

propagation losses can facilitate 

spectrum re-use in microcellular 

deployments by limiting the amount of 

interference between adjacent cells. 

Furthermore, where longer paths are 

desired, the extremely short 

wavelengths of mmW signals make it 

feasible for very small antennas to 

concentrate signals into highly focused 

beams with enough gain to overcome 

propagation losses. The short 

wavelengths of mmW signals also make 

it possible to build multi-element, 

dynamic beam-forming antennas that 

will be small enough to fit into 

handsets—a feat that might never be 

possible at the lower, longer-wavelength 

frequencies below 6 GHz where cell 

phones operate today. 

54. In the 3rd FNPRM, the 

Commission also seeks comment on 

developing the licensing framework it 

has adopted for the 37–37.6 GHz band. 

That framework creates an innovative 

shared space that can be used by a wide 

variety of Federal and non-Federal 

users, by new entrants and by 

established operators—and smaller 

businesses in particular—to experiment 

with new technologies in the mmW 

space. The Commission seeks comment 

on a first-come-first-served licensing or 

registration scheme, in which actual 

users have a right to interference 

protection, but no right to exclude other 

users. The Commission seeks comment 

on subsequent users being required to 

coordinate with previously registered 

non-Federal and Federal sites through 

part 101 notice and response rules or on 

the alternative of registering facilities 

with a third-party coordinator. 

55. The 3rd FNPRM also proposes to 

adopt rules permitting licensing of 

individual FSS earth stations in the 

50.4–51.4 GHz band using the criteria 

identical to those applicable in the 

24.75–25.25 GHz band. Although the 

50.4–52.6 GHz band remains under 

consideration for UMFUS licensing, the 

Commission has throughout this 

proceeding sought to promote spectrum 

efficiency by permitting spectrum made 

available for UMFUS to be shared with 

other allocated services when possible. 

The Commission believes that in the 

50.4–51.4 GHz band, where an FSS 

allocation already exists, that a limited 

number of individually licensed FSS 

earth stations can share the 50.4–51.4 

GHz band with minimal impact on 

terrestrial operations. 

56. Overall, this proposal is designed 

to provide for flexible use of this 

spectrum by allowing licensees to 

choose their type of service offerings, to 

encourage innovation and investment in 

mobile broadband use in this spectrum, 

and to provide a stable regulatory 

environment in which fixed, mobile, 

and satellite deployment would be able 

to develop through the application of 

flexible rules. The market-oriented 

licensing framework for these bands 

would ensure that this spectrum is 

efficiently utilized and will foster the 

development of new and innovative 

technologies and services, as well as 

encourage the growth and development 

of a wide variety of services, ultimately 

leading to greater benefits to consumers. 

B. Legal Basis 

57. The proposed action is authorized 

pursuant to sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 301, 

302, 302a, 303, 304, 307, 309, and 310 

of the Communications Act of 1934, as 

amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 153, 154, 

155, 157, 301, 302, 302a, 303, 304, 307, 

309, and 310, section 706 of the 

Telecommunications Act of 1996, as 

amended, 47 U.S.C. 1302. 

C. Description and Estimate of the 

Number of Small Entities to Which the 

Proposed Rules Will Apply 

58. 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 proposed rules, if adopted. The RFA 

generally defines the term ‘‘small 

entity’’ as having the same meaning as 

the terms ‘‘small business,’’ ‘‘small 

organization,’’ and ‘‘small governmental 

jurisdiction.’’ In addition, the term 

‘‘small business’’ has the same meaning 

as the term ‘‘small business concern’’ 

under the Small Business Act.’’ 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 

SBA. 

59. Small Businesses, Small 

Organizations, Small Governmental 

Jurisdictions. The Commission’s 

actions, over time, may affect small 

entities that are not easily categorized at 

present. The Commission therefore 

describes here, at the outset, three broad 

groups of small entities that could be 

directly affected herein. First, while 

there are industry specific size 

standards for small businesses that are 

used in the regulatory flexibility 

analysis, according to data from the 

SBA’s Office of Advocacy, in general a 

small business is an independent 

business having fewer than 500 

employees. These types of small 

businesses represent 99.9% of all 

businesses in the United States which 

translates to 28.8 million businesses. 

60. Next, the type of small entity 

described as a ‘‘small organization’’ is 

generally ‘‘any not-for-profit enterprise 

which is independently owned and 

operated and is not dominant in its 

field.’’ Nationwide, as of August 2016, 

there were approximately 356,494 small 

organizations based on registration and 

tax data filed by nonprofits with the 

Internal Revenue Service (IRS). 

61. Finally, the small entity described 

as a ‘‘small governmental jurisdiction’’ 

is defined generally as ‘‘governments of 

cities, counties, towns, townships, 

villages, school districts, or special 

districts, with a population of less than 

fifty thousand.’’ U.S. Census Bureau 

data from the 2012 Census of 

Governments indicate that there were 

90,056 local governmental jurisdictions 

consisting of general purpose 

governments and special purpose 

governments in the United States. Of 

this number there were 37, 132 General 

purpose governments (county, 

municipal and town or township) with 

populations of less than 50,000 and 

12,184 Special purpose governments 

(independent school districts and 

special districts) with populations of 

less than 50,000. The 2012 U.S. Census 

Bureau data for most types of 

governments in the local government 

category show that the majority of these 

governments have populations of less 

than 50,000. Based on this data the 

Commission estimates that at least 

49,316 local government jurisdictions 

fall in the category of ‘‘small 

governmental jurisdictions.’’ 

62. Wireless Telecommunications 

Carriers (except Satellite). This industry 

comprises establishments engaged in 

operating and maintaining switching 

and transmission facilities to provide 

communications via the airwaves. 

Establishments in this industry have 

spectrum licenses and provide services 

using that spectrum, such as cellular 

services, paging services, wireless 

internet access, and wireless video 

services. The appropriate size standard 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
34530 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 140 / Friday, July 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

under SBA rules is that such a business 

is small if it has 1,500 or fewer 

employees. For this industry, U.S. 

Census Bureau data for 2012 show that 

there were 967 firms that operated for 

the entire year. Of this total, 955 firms 

had employment of 999 or fewer 

employees and 12 had employment of 

1,000 employees or more. Thus under 

this category and the associated size 

standard, the Commission estimates that 

the majority of wireless 

telecommunications carriers (except 

satellite) are small entities. 

63. Fixed Microwave Services. 

Microwave services include common 

carrier, private-operational fixed, and 

broadcast auxiliary radio services. They 

also include the UMFUS the Millimeter 

Wave Service, Local Multipoint 

Distribution Service (LMDS), the Digital 

Electronic Message Service (DEMS), and 

the 24 GHz Service, where licensees can 

choose between common carrier and 

non-common carrier status. At present, 

there are approximately 66,680 common 

carrier fixed licensees, 69,360 private 

and public safety operational-fixed 

licensees, 20,150 broadcast auxiliary 

radio licensees, 411 LMDS licenses, 33 

24 GHz DEMS licenses, 777 39 GHz 

licenses, and five 24 GHz licensees, and 

467 Millimeter Wave licenses in the 

microwave services. The Commission 

has not yet defined a small business 

with respect to microwave services. The 

closest applicable SBA category is 

Wireless Telecommunications Carriers 

(except Satellite) and the appropriate 

size standard for this category under 

SBA rules is that such a business is 

small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. 

For this industry, U.S. Census Bureau 

data for 2012 shows that there were 967 

firms that operated for the entire year. 

Of this total, 955 had employment of 

999 or fewer, and 12 firms had 

employment of 1,000 employees or 

more. Thus under this SBA category and 

the associated standard, the 

Commission estimates that the majority 

of fixed microwave service licensees can 

be considered small. 

64. The Commission does not have 

data specifying the number of these 

licensees that have more than 1,500 

employees, and thus is unable at this 

time to estimate with greater precision 

the number of fixed microwave service 

licensees that would qualify as small 

business concerns under the SBA’s 

small business size standard. 

Consequently, the Commission 

estimates that there are up to 36,708 

common carrier fixed licensees and up 

to 59,291 private operational-fixed 

licensees and broadcast auxiliary radio 

licensees in the microwave services that 

may be small and may be affected by the 

rules and policies adopted herein. The 

Commission notes, however, that both 

the common carrier microwave fixed 

and the private operational microwave 

fixed licensee categories includes some 

large entities. 

65. Satellite Telecommunications. 

This category comprises firms 

‘‘primarily engaged in providing 

telecommunications services to other 

establishments in the 

telecommunications and broadcasting 

industries by forwarding and receiving 

communications signals via a system of 

satellites or reselling satellite 

telecommunications.’’ Satellite 

telecommunications service providers 

include satellite and earth station 

operators. The category has a small 

business size standard of $32.5 million 

or less in average annual receipts, under 

SBA rules. For this category, U.S. 

Census Bureau data for 2012 shows that 

there were a total of 333 firms that 

operated for the entire year. Of this 

total, 299 firms had annual receipts of 

less than $25 million. Consequently, the 

Commission estimates that the majority 

of satellite telecommunications 

providers are small entities. 

66. All Other Telecommunications. 

The ‘‘All Other Telecommunications’’ 

category is comprised of establishments 

primarily engaged in providing 

specialized telecommunications 

services, such as satellite tracking, 

communications telemetry, and radar 

station operation. This industry also 

includes establishments primarily 

engaged in providing satellite terminal 

stations and associated facilities 

connected with one or more terrestrial 

systems and capable of transmitting 

telecommunications to, and receiving 

telecommunications from, satellite 

systems. Establishments providing 

internet services or voice over internet 

protocol (VoIP) services via clientsupplied telecommunications 

connections are also included in this 

industry.’’ The SBA has developed a 

small business size standard for ‘‘All 

Other Telecommunications,’’ which 

consists of all such firms with gross 

annual receipts of $32.5 million or less. 

For this category, U.S. Census Bureau 

data for 2012 shows that there were a 

total of 1,442 firms that operated for the 

entire year. Of these firms, a total of 

1400 firms had gross annual receipts of 

under $25 million and 42 firms had 

gross annual receipts of $25 million to 

$49, 999,999. Thus, the Commission 

estimates that a majority of ‘‘All Other 

Telecommunications’’ firms potentially 

affected by its actions can be considered 

small. 

67. Radio and Television 

Broadcasting and Wireless 

Communications Equipment 

Manufacturing. This industry comprises 

establishments primarily engaged in 

manufacturing radio and television 

broadcast and wireless communications 

equipment. Examples of products made 

by these establishments are: 

Transmitting and receiving antennas, 

cable television equipment, GPS 

equipment, pagers, cellular phones, 

mobile communications equipment, and 

radio and television studio and 

broadcasting equipment.’’ The SBA has 

established a size standard for this 

industry of 1,250 employees or less. 

U.S. Census Bureau data for 2012 shows 

that 841 establishments operated in this 

industry in that year. Of that number, 

828 establishments operated with fewer 

than 1,000 employees, 7 establishments 

operated with between 1,000 and 2,499 

employees and 6 establishments 

operated with 2,500 or more employees. 

Based on this data, the Commission 

concludes that a majority of 

manufacturers in this industry is small. 

D. Description of Projected Reporting, 

Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance 

Requirements 

68. The Commission expects the rules 

proposed in the 3rd FNPRM will impose 

new or additional reporting or 

recordkeeping and/or other compliance 

obligations on small entities as well as 

other licensees and applicants. 

69. Applicants in the Lower 37 GHz 

band will be required to coordinate their 

proposed operations with other 

licensees and applicants. Such 

coordination is necessary to ensure that 

neighboring operations will not interfere 

with each other. Potential applicants 

will also be required to coordinate their 

operations with any Federal agencies 

with operations in the areas. 

70. Small entities and other 

applicants in 26 GHz, 42 GHz, and 

Lower 37 GHz UMFUS will be required 

to meet buildout requirements. In doing 

so, they will be required to provide 

information to the Commission on the 

facilities they have constructed, the 

nature of the service they are providing, 

and the extent to which they are 

providing coverage in their license area. 

With respect to the 26 GHz performance 

requirements, the Commission believes 

such requirements are necessary to 

ensure that spectrum is being put into 

use and has proposed a variety of 

metrics to provide small entities as well 

as other licensees with a variety of 

means by which they may demonstrate 

compliance. The Commissions 

anticipates the performance 

requirements will encourage rapid 

deployment of next generation wireless 

services, including 5G, which will 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 140 / Friday, July 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules 34531 

benefit small entities and the industry 

as a whole. 

E. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant 

Economic Impact on Small Entities, and 

Significant Alternatives Considered 

71. The RFA requires an agency to 

describe any significant alternatives for 

small businesses that it has considered 

in reaching its proposed approach, 

which may include the following four 

alternatives (among others): (1) The 

establishment of differing compliance or 

reporting requirements or timetables 

that take into account the resources 

available to small entities; (2) the 

clarification, consolidation, or 

simplification of compliance and 

reporting requirements under the rule 

for such small entities; (3) the use of 

performance rather than design 

standards; and (4) an exemption from 

coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, 

for such small entities. 

72. The Commission does not believe 

that its proposed changes will have a 

significant economic impact on small 

entities. The Commission believes the 

proposed site-based licensing scheme 

for the Lower 37 GHz band would 

facilitate access to spectrum by small 

businesses and a wide variety of other 

entities. However, to get a better 

understanding of costs and any burdens, 

the Commission seeks comment on 

whether any of burdens associated the 

filing, recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements described above can be 

minimized for small businesses. In 

particular, the Commission seeks 

comment on whether any of the costs 

associated with its construction or 

performance requirements in the 26 

GHz and Lower 37 GHz bands can be 

alleviated for small businesses. The 

Commission expects to more fully 

consider the economic impact and 

alternatives for small entities following 

the review of comments filed in 

response to the 3rd FNPRM. 

F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, 

Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed 

Rules 

73. None. 

VIII. Ordering Clauses 

74. It is ordered, pursuant to the 

authority found in sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 

7, 301, 302, 302a, 303, 304, 307, 309, 

and 310 of the Communications Act of 

1934, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 

157, 301, 302, 302a, 303, 304, 307, 309, 

and 310, section 706 of the 

Telecommunications Act of 1996, as 

amended, 47 U.S.C. 1302, and § 1.411 of 

the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.411, 

that this Third Report and Order, Third 

Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 

and Memorandum Opinion and Order is 

hereby adopted. 

75. It is further ordered that the 

Commission’s Consumer and 

Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference 

Information Center, shall send a copy of 

this Third Report and Order, Third 

Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 

and Memorandum Opinion and Order, 

including the Final, Supplemental 

Final, and Initial Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for 

Advocacy of the Small Business 

Administration. 

76. It is further ordered that the 

Commission shall send a copy of this 

Report and Order to Congress and the 

Government Accountability Office 

pursuant to the Congressional Review 

Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A). 

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Parts 2, 25 

and 30 

Communications common carriers, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Communications 

equipment. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Marlene Dortch, 

Secretary, Office of the Secretary. 

Proposed Rules 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Federal Communications 

Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR 

parts 2, 25, and 30 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, 302a, 303, and 

336, unless otherwise noted. 

■ 2. In § 2.106, the Table of Frequency 

Allocations is amended as follows: 

■ a. Revise pages 54, 55, 58, and 60. 

■ b. In the list of non-Federal 

Government (NG) Footnotes, footnote 

NG65 is revised. 

§ 2.106 Table of Frequency Allocations. 

The revisions read as follows: 

* * * * * 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS

EP20JY18.001</GPH>daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS

24-24.05 24-24.05 24-24.05 

AMATEUR AMATEUR AMATEUR-SATELLITE AMATEUR-SATELLITE 

5.150 5.150 US211 5.150 US211 

24.05-24.25 24.05-24.25 24.05-24.25 

RADIOLOCATION RADIOLOCATION G59 Amateur 

Amateur Earth exploration-satellite (active] Earth exploration-satellite (a

Earth exploration-satellite (active) Radiolocation 

5.150 5.150 5.150 

24.25-24.45 24.25-24.45 24.25-24.45 24.25-24.45 24.25-24.45 

FIXED RADIONAVIGATION FIXED FIXED 

MOBILE MOBILE 

RADIONAVIGATION 

24.45-24.65 24.45-24.65 24.45-24.65 24.45-24.65 

FIXED INTER-SATELLITE FIXED INTER-SATELLITE 

INTER-SATELLITE RADIONAVIGATION INTER-SATELLITE RADIONAVIGATION 

MOBILE 

RADIONAVIGATION 

5.533 5.533 5.533 

24.65-24.75 24.65-24.75 24.65-24.75 24.65-24.75 

FIXED INTER-SATELLITE FIXED INTER-SATELLITE FIXED-SATELLITE RADIOLOCATION-SATELLITE FIXED-SATELLITE RADIOLOCATION-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 

(Earth-to-space] 5.532B (Earth-to-space] (Earth-to-space] 5.532B 

INTER-SATELLITE INTER-SATELLITE 

MOBILE 

5.533 

24.75-25.25 24.75-25.25 24.75-25.25 24.75-25.25 24.75-25.25 

FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE FIXED FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.535 FIXED-SATELLITE FIXED-SATELLITE 

(Earth-to-space) 5.532B (Earth-to-space) 5.535 (Earth-to-space) NG65 

MOBILE MOBILE 

25.25-25.5 25.25-25.5 25.25-25.5 

FIXED FIXED FIXED 

INTER-SATELLITE 5.536 INTER-SATELLITE 5.536 MOBILE 

MOBILE MOBILE Inter-satellite 5.536 

Standard frequency and time signal-satellite (Earth-to-space] Standard frequency and time Standard frequency and time 

signal-satellite (Earth-to-space) signal-satellite (Earth-to-sp

25.5-27 25.5-27 25.5-27 

EARTH EXPLORATION-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.536B EARTH EXPLORATION- FIXED 

FIXED SATELLITE (space-to-Earth] MOBILE 

INTER-SATELLITE 5.536 FIXED SPACE RESEARCH 

MOBILE INTER-SATELLITE 5.536 (space-to-Earth) 

SPACE RESEARCH (space-to-Earth) 5.536C MOBILE Inter-satellite 5.536 

Standard frequency and time signal-satellite (Earth-to-space) SPACE RESEARCH Standard frequency and time (space-to-Earth) signal-satellite (Earth-to-sp

Standard frequency and time 

signal-satellite (Earth-to-space) 

5.536A 5.536A US258 5.536A US258 

EP20JY18.002</GPH>daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS

Table of Frequency Allocations 27-34.7 GHz (SHF/EHF) 

lntemational Table United States Table 

Region 1 Table Region 2 Table Region 3 Table Federal Table Non-Federal Table 

27-27.5 27-27.5 27-27.5 27-27.5 

FIXED FIXED FIXED FIXED 

INTER-SATELLITE 5.536 FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) INTER-SATELLITE 5.536 MOBILE 

MOBILE INTER-SATELLITE 5.536 5.537 MOBILE 5.536 

MOBILE 

27.5-28.5 27.5-30 27.5-28.35 

FIXED 5.537A FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.484A 5.516B 5.539 FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth

MOBILE MOBILE 

5.538 5.540 28.35-29.1 

28.5-29.1 FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth

FIXED NG165 FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.484A 5.516B 5.523A 5.539 

MOBILE 

Earth exploration-satellite (Earth-to-space) 5.541 

5.540 NG62 

29.1-29.5 29.1-29.25 

FIXED FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.516B 5.523C 5.523E 5.535A 5.539 5.541A FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth

MOBILE NG166 

Earth exploration-satellite (Earth-to-space) 5.541 MOBILE 

29.25-29.5 

FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth

NG535A 

5.540 NG62 

29.5-29.9 29.5-29.9 29.5-29.9 29.5-30 

FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth

5.484A 5.516B 5.539 5.484A 5.516B 5.539 5.484A 5.516B 5.539 MOBILE-SATELLITE 

Earth exploration-satellite MOBILE-SATELLITE Earth exploration-satellite (Earth-to-space) (Earth-to-space) 5.541 (Earth-to-space) (Earth-to-space) 5.541 Mobile-satellite (Earth-to-space) Earth exploration-satellite 

(Earth-to-space) 5.541 

Mobile-satellite (Earth-to-space) 

5.525 5.526 5.527 5.529 5.540 

5.540 5.542 5.542 5.540 5.542 

29.9-30 

FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.484A 5.516B 5.539 

MOBILE-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) Earth exploration-satellite (Earth-to-space) 5.541 5.543 

5.525 5.526 5.527 5.538 5.540 5.542 5.525 5.526 5.527 5.529 

30-31 30-31 30-31 

FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.338A FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) Standard frequency and ti

MOBILE-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) MOBILE-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) signal-satellite (space-to

Standard frequency and time signal-satellite (space-to-Earth) Standard frequency and time 

signal-satellite (space-to-Earth) 

5.542 G117 

EP20JY18.003</GPH>daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS

40-40.5 40-40.5 40-40.5 

EARTH EXPLORATION-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) EARTH EXPLORATION- FIXED-sATELLITE (space-to-E

FIXED SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) MOBILE-SATELLITE (space-toFIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.516B FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 

MOBILE MOBILE-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 

MOBILE-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) SPACE RESEARCH (Earth-to-space) 

SPACE RESEARCH (Earth-to-space) Earth exploration-satellite 

Earth exploration-satellite (space-to-Earth) (space-to-Earth) 

G117 

40.5-41 40.5-41 40.5-41 40.5-41 40.5-41 

FIXED FIXED FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) FIXED-sATELLITE (space-to-EFIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to- FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to- Mobile-satellite (space-to-Earth) BROADCASTING 

BROADCASTING Earth) 5.516B Earth) BROADCAST! NG-SATELLITE 

BROADCASTING-SATELLITE BROADCASTING BROADCASTING Fixed Mobile BROADCAST! NG-SATELLITE BROADCAST! NG-SATELLITE Mobile 

Mobile Mobile Mobile-satellite (space-to-Earth

Mobile-satellite (space-to-Earth) 

5.547 5.547 5.547 US211 G117 US211 

41-42.5 41-42.5 41-42 

FIXED FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.516B FIXED-sATELLITE (space-to-E

BROADCASTING MOBILE 

BROADCASTING-SATELLITE BROADCASTING Mobile BROADCAST! NG-SATELLITE 

US211 

42-42.5 

FIXED 

MOBILE 

5.547 5.551 F 5.551 H 5.5511 US211 US211 

42.5-43.5 42.5-43.5 42.5-43.5 

FIXED FIXED RADIO ASTRONOMY FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.552 FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 

MOBILE except aeronautical mobile MOBILE except aeronautical mobile 

RADIO ASTRONOMY RADIO ASTRONOMY 

5.149 5.547 US342 US342 

43.5-47 43.5-45.5 43.5-45.5 

MOBILE 5.553 FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 

MOBILE-SATELLITE MOBILE-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 

RADIONAVIGATION RADIONAVIGATION-SATELLITE G117 

45.5-46.9 

MOBILE 

MOBILE-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 

RADIONAVIGATION-SATELLITE 

5.554 

5.554 
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 140 / Friday, July 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules 34535 

* * * * * 

Non-Federal Government (NG) 

Footnotes 

* * * * * 

NG65 In the bands 24.75–25.25 GHz, 

47.2–48.2 GHz and 50.4–51.4 GHz, 

stations in the fixed and mobile services 

may not claim protection from 

individually licensed earth stations 

authorized pursuant to 47 CFR 25.136. 

However, nothing in this footnote shall 

limit the right of UMFUS licensees to 

operate in conformance with the 

technical rules contained in 47 CFR part 

30. The Commission reserves the right 

to monitor developments and to 

undertake further action concerning 

interference between UMFUS and FSS, 

including aggregate interference to 

satellite receivers, if appropriate. 

* * * * * 

PART 25—SATELLITE 

COMMUNICATIONS 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 25 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 301, 302, 303, 

307, 309, 310, 319, 332, 605, and 721, unless 

otherwise noted. 

■ 4. Amend § 25.136 by revising the 

section heading and paragraph (g), and 

adding paragraph (h) to read as follows: 

§ 25.136 Earth Stations in the 24.75–25.25 

GHz, 27.5–28.35 GHz, 37.5–40 GHz, 47.2– 

48.2 GHz and 50.4–51.4 GHz bands. 

* * * * * 

(g) Notwithstanding that FSS is coprimary with the Upper Microwave 

Flexible Use Service in the 24.75–25.25 

GHz and 50.4–51.4 GHz bands, earth 

stations in these bands shall be limited 

to individually licensed earth stations. 

An applicant for a license for a 

transmitting earth station in the 24.75– 

25.25 GHz or 50.4–51.4 GHz band must 

meet one of the following criteria to be 

authorized to operate without providing 

any additional interference protection to 

stations in the Upper Microwave 

Flexible Use Service: 

(1) The FSS licensee also holds the 

relevant Upper Microwave Flexible Use 

Service license(s) for the area in which 

the earth station generates a power flux 

density (PFD), at 10 meters above 

ground level, of greater than or equal to 

¥77.6dBm/m2/MHz; 

(2) The earth station in the 24.75– 

25.25 GHz band was authorized prior to 

August 20, 2018; or the earth station in 

the 50.4.2–51.4 GHz band was 

authorized prior to [effective date of this 

rule]; or 

(3) The application for the earth 

station in the 24.75–25.25 GHz band 

was filed prior to August 20, 2018; or 

the application for the earth station in 

the 50.4–51.4 GHz band was filed prior 

to [effective date for this rule]; or 

(4) The applicant demonstrates 

compliance with all of the following 

criteria in its application: 

(i) There are no more than two other 

authorized earth stations operating in 

the same frequency band within the 

county where the proposed earth station 

is located that meet the criteria 

contained in either paragraphs (g)(1) 

(g)(2), (g)(3) or (g)(4) of this section, and 

there are no more than 14 other 

authorized earth stations operating in 

the same frequency band within the 

Partial Economic Area where the 

proposed earth station is located that 

meet the criteria contained in 

paragraphs (g)(1) (g)(2), (g)(3) or (g)(4) of 

this section. For purposes of this 

requirement, multiple earth stations that 

are collocated with or at a location 

contiguous to each other shall be 

considered as one earth station; 

(ii) The area in which the earth station 

generates a power flux density (PFD), at 

10 meters above ground level, of greater 

than or equal to ¥77.6 dBm/m2/MHz, 

together with the similar area of any 

other earth station operating in the same 

frequency band authorized pursuant to 

paragraph (e) of this section, does not 

cover, in the aggregate, more than the 

amount of population of the county 

within which the earth station is located 

as noted below: 

TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (g)(4)(ii) 

Population within the County where earth 

station is located 

Maximum permitted aggregate 

population within ¥77.6 dBm/m2/MHz 

PFD contour of earth stations 

Greater than 450,000 ................................................................................................................................ 0.1 percent of population in county. 

Between 6,000 and 450,000 ..................................................................................................................... 450 people. 

Fewer than 6,000 ....................................................................................................................................... 7.5 percent of population in county. 

(h) If an earth station applicant or 

licensee in the 24.75–25.25 GHz, 27.5– 

28.35 GHz, 37.5–40 GHz, 47.2–48.2 GHz 

and/or 50.4–51.4 GHz bands enters into 

an agreement with an UMFUS licensee, 

their operations shall be governed by 

that agreement, except to the extent that 

the agreement is inconsistent with the 

Commission’s rules or the 

Communications Act. 

* * * * * 

PART 30—UPPER MICROWAVE 

FLEXIBLE USE SERVICE 

■ 5. The authority citation for part 30 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 153, 154, 

301, 303, 304, 307, 309, 310, 316, 332, 1302. 

■ 6. Amend § 30.4 by: 

■ a. Redesignating paragraphs (b) 

through (e) as paragraphs (c), (d), (f), 

and (g), and 

■ b. Adding a new paragraph (b) and (e). 

The additions read as follows: 

§ 30.4 Frequencies. 

* * * * * 

(b) 25.25–27.5 GHz band—25.25– 

25.45 GHz; 25.45–25.65 GHz; 25.65– 

25.85 GHz; 25.85–26.05 GHz; 26.05– 

26.25 GHz; 26.25–26.45 GHz; 26.45– 

26.65 GHz; 26.65–26.85 GHz; 26.85– 

27.05 GHz; 27.05–27.25 GHz; 27.25– 

27.45 GHz; 27.45–27.5 GHz. 

* * * * * 

(e) 42–42.5 GHz band—42–42.1 GHz; 

42.1–42.2 GHz; 42.2–42.3 GHz; 42.3– 

42.4 GHz; 42.4–42.5 GHz. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2018–14807 Filed 7–19–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS