[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 245 (Monday, December 22, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 76282-76295]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-29688]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 27 and 73

[GN Docket No. 12-268; ET Docket Nos. 13-26 and 14-14; FCC 14-157]


Expanding the Economic and Innovation Opportunities of Spectrum 
Through Incentive Auctions

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document seeks comment on proposed rules to govern the 
interference relationship between broadcast television and wireless 
service in the 600 MHz Band following the incentive auction. The 
Commission anticipates that after the auction some broadcast television 
stations may operate on channels in the 600 MHz Band as a result of 
market variation. The Commission proposes to allow no harmful 
interference from wireless operations to reception of television 
service; the Commission proposes to require wireless licensees to use 
proposed OET Bulletin No. 74 (OET-74) before deploying base stations; 
and seeks comment on how the ISIX Methodology and inputs adopted in the 
companion Second Report & Order can be adapted to predict inter-service 
interference between wireless services and analog television stations 
in Canada and Mexico, for purposes of identifying license impairments 
during the auction. In addition, the Commission proposes not to permit 
broadcast licensees who operate in the 600 MHz Band to expand their 
noise-limited or protected contours if doing so would increase the 
potential for interference to a wireless licensee's service area.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or before January 21, 2015, and reply 
comments must be filed on or before February 5, 2015.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by GN Docket No. 12-268 
and ET Docket Nos. 13-26 and 14-14, by any of the following methods:
    [ssquf] Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    [ssquf] Federal Communications Commission's Web site: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    [ssquf] Email: [Optional: Include the Email address only if you 
plan to accept comments from the general public]. Include the docket 
number(s) in the subject line of the message.
    [ssquf] Mail: [Optional: Include the mailing address for paper, 
disk or CD-ROM

[[Page 76283]]

submissions needed/requested by your Bureau or Office. Do not include 
the Office of the Secretary's mailing address here.]

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: Aspasia Paroutsas, Office of 
Engineering and Technology, 202-418-7285, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e7a6949786948e86c9b78695889293948694a7818484c9808891"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="dd9caeadbcaeb4bcf38dbcafb2a8a9aebcae9dbbbebef3bab2ab">[email protected]</span></a>, 
TTY (202) 418-2989.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Second 
Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making, GN Docket 
no. 12-268 and ET Docket No. 13-26 and 14-14; FCC 14-157, adopted 
October 16, 2014, and released October 17, 2014. The full text of this 
document is available for inspection and copying during normal business 
hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room CY-A257), 445 12th Street SW., 
Washington, DC 20554. The complete text of this document also may be 
purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, Best Copy and 
Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street SW., Room, CY-B402, Washington, DC 
20554. The full text may also be downloaded at: www.fcc.gov.
    Pursuant to Sec. Sec.  1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules, 
47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments and reply 
comments on or before the dates indicated on the first page of this 
document. Comments may be filed using the Commission's Electronic 
Comment Filing System (ECFS). See Electronic Filing of Documents in 
Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (1998).
    [ssquf] Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically 
using the Internet by accessing the ECFS: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/.
    [ssquf] 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.
    [ssquf] All hand-delivered or messenger-delivered 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.
    [ssquf] Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service 
Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton 
Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743.
    [ssquf] 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 <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#294f4a4a1c191d694f4a4a074e465f"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d9bfbabaece9ed99bfbabaf7beb6af">[email protected]</span></a> or call the Consumer & 
Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-418-0432 
(tty).

Summary of the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    1. In this Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making (FNPRM), the 
Commission seeks comment on proposed rules to govern the interference 
relationship between broadcast television and wireless service in the 
600 MHz Band following the incentive auction. As discussed in the 
companion Second Report & Order, the Commission anticipates that after 
the auction some broadcast television stations may operate on channels 
in the 600 MHz Band as a result of market variation. The Commission 
proposes to allow no harmful interference from wireless operations to 
reception of television service. There are two scenarios that present 
the potential for harmful interference to television stations, 
depending on whether a station is assigned to the 600 MHz Band downlink 
or uplink spectrum. First, if a station is located in the downlink 
spectrum, we will need to protect against harmful interference from 
wireless base stations to TV receivers (Case 3). Second, if a station 
is located in the uplink spectrum, the Commission will need to consider 
interference from wireless user equipment to TV receivers (Case 4). As 
an initial matter, this FNPRM addresses the level of inter-service 
interference to television stations in the 600 MHz Band that should be 
permitted. The Commission also proposes a methodology for new 600 MHz 
Band licensees to predict whether wireless operations will interfere 
with television stations in the 600 MHz Band in order to identify the 
``permitted boundaries'' of wireless license areas following the 
auction. Specifically, for Case 3 scenarios, the Commission seeks 
comment on requiring wireless licensees to use proposed OET Bulletin 
No. 74 (OET-74). For Case 4 scenarios, the Commission proposes to adopt 
the same fixed separation distances adopted in the companion Second 
Report & Order for use in the incentive auction. In the event that 
wireless operations actually cause harmful interference to television 
reception in the 600 MHz Band where interference was not predicted to 
occur, we also propose to require wireless providers to take action to 
eliminate the interference.
    2. The Commission also seeks comment in this FNPRM on procedures to 
prevent inter-service interference following the incentive auction. It 
proposes to require wireless providers to analyze potential 
interference to any co-channel or adjacent channel television station 
in the 600 MHz Band within a set distance using the methodology in OET-
74 before deploying base stations, regardless of whether the wireless 
license area was identified as ``impaired'' in the auction. The 
Commission also proposes to allow broadcast television stations in the 
600 MHz Band to modify their facilities only to the degree that doing 
so does not extend their contours in the direction of a co-channel or 
adjacent-channel 600 MHz Band wireless license area within a set 
distance.
    3. This FNPRM also seeks comment on how the ISIX Methodology and 
inputs adopted in the companion Second Report & Order for predicting 
interference to wireless operations from television stations (Cases 1 
and 2) should be modified to predict harmful interference that LPTV and 
TV translator stations may cause to 600 MHz Band wireless service as it 
is deployed following the auction. Further, the Commission proposes to 
allow new 600 MHz Band wireless licensees that intend to deploy 
facilities during the 39-month Post Auction Transition Period to use 
the ISIX Methodology and inputs, as detailed in the proposed OET-74, to 
determine whether there is any potential for harmful interference to a 
television station that has not yet cleared its pre-auction channel in 
the 600 MHz Band.
    4. Finally, the Commission seeks comment on how the ISIX 
Methodology and inputs adopted in the companion Second Report & Order 
can be adapted to predict inter-service interference between wireless 
services and analog television stations in Canada and Mexico, for 
purposes of identifying license impairments during the auction.

[[Page 76284]]

Protecting Television Stations in the 600 MHz Band From Inter-Service 
Interference

Proposed Threshold for Interference From Wireless Operations to 
Television Stations in the 600 MHz Band

    5. The Commission proposes to establish a zero percent threshold 
for harmful interference. Under this approach, 600 MHz Band wireless 
licensees would not be permitted to cause harmful interference within 
the service area of a full power station or the protected contour of a 
Class A station, to the degree it affects population within that 
service area or protected contour.
    6. The Commission proposes this threshold for a number of reasons. 
First, a different, more cautious approach may be warranted than in the 
context of preventing harmful interference between television stations 
because this will be the first time such proposed methodology is used. 
Second, the Commission does not believe that a zero percent 
interference threshold would undermine the goals for the incentive 
auction. Third, the Commission is concerned that there is a potential 
for significant aggregate new interference from wireless operations to 
television stations if it set a de minimis threshold. The is no safety 
valve measures available to address aggregate wireless interference 
like they are in addressing aggregate television-to-television 
interference, and the risk of significant levels of new aggregate 
wireless interference is higher. Six megahertz channels in the 
television bands are aligned, and only a limited number of television 
stations can operate on the same or adjacent channels in nearby areas. 
In contrast, varying degrees of spectral overlap between six-megahertz 
television channels and five-megahertz wireless spectrum blocks in the 
600 MHz Band, along with the different technical facilities employed by 
television and wireless services, create the potential for multiple co- 
and adjacent-channel relationships between television stations and 
wireless operations in the 600 MHz Band in the same or nearby 
geographic areas. Fourth, the Commission does not think that an 
aggregate threshold for interference to television stations from 
wireless operations would be either feasible or practical. For these 
reasons, the Commission proposes a zero percent threshold for 
interference from wireless operations to television stations following 
the incentive auction.
    7. In the event that interference is predicted between television 
stations assigned in the 600 MHz Band, the Commission proposes to treat 
that interference as ``masking interference'' in evaluating wireless 
interference to a television station. That is, in a grid cell where 
masking interference to one television station from another is 
predicted to occur, the Commission proposes to ignore the inter-service 
interference from the wireless operations. This approach would be 
consistent with the treatment of interference between television 
stations under the rules. The Commission seeks comment on this 
proposal.

Proposed Methodology and Inputs for Predicting Interference to 
Television Stations in the 600 MHz Band From Wireless Operations

Case 3: Interference From Wireless Base Stations to Television Stations 
Assigned to the 600 MHz Downlink Spectrum
    8. If television stations are assigned to the 600 MHz Band downlink 
spectrum, the Commission proposes to (1) prohibit a wireless licensee 
from operating base stations within the contour of a co-channel or 
adjacent-channel DTV station and (2) require the wireless licensee to 
use the proposed OET-74 to predict interference to such station's 
service prior to deploying wireless base stations within a specified 
culling distance of the station's contour. The Commission seeks comment 
on these proposals. The culling distances proposed are based on the 
spectral overlap between wireless operations and broadcast television 
operations, and the power and antenna height of wireless base stations. 
The Commission seeks comment on this proposal and the specific 
distances proposed in OET-74. Because there is the potential for 
impairments in any license that is co-channel or adjacent channel with 
a broadcast television station, the Commission proposes to apply these 
requirements to all wireless operations within the culling distance 
that are co-channel or adjacent channel to a broadcast television 
station, regardless of whether the wireless licensee's spectrum block 
was identified as ``impaired'' in the auction.
    9. The proposed methodology and input values for predicting 
interference from a wireless base station into DTV service are set 
forth in detail in the proposed OET-74. The OET-74 methodology is 
similar to the ISIX Methodology for Case 3 adopted in the companion 
Second Report & Order, but instead of a placement of hypothetical 
wireless base stations and the associated technical parameters, 
wireless providers would be required to use the actual technical 
parameters of their base stations. The Commission proposes to require 
wireless providers planning co-channel or adjacent-channel operations 
with any television stations in the 600 MHz Band downlink spectrum to 
apply the OET-74 methodology using the actual location, HAAT, ERP, and 
antenna pattern and orientation of their base stations prior to 
deployment of such facilities within the specified culling distance of 
a television station's contour. To provide wireless providers with 
additional flexibility, the Commission also proposes to allow them to 
elect to use omnidirectional patterns in their analyses rather than 
actual antenna patterns, either in azimuth or elevation. The Commission 
requests comment on this proposal.
    10. The Commission proposes to incorporate the root sum square 
(RSS) method into OET-74 to predict the potential for aggregate 
interference to a television station from multiple wireless base 
stations. As noted, broadcasters raise concerns with regard to the 
potential for interfering LTE signals to combine at the point of DTV 
signal reception, resulting in additional interference. In the Second 
Report & Order, the Commission declined to apply the RSS method during 
the auction because the predictions of inter-service interference will 
be based on a hypothetical network deployment. In contrast, because 
proposed OET-74 would be based on real-world network deployments, the 
Commission believes that its accuracy would be improved by application 
of RSS method. Accordingly, the Commission proposes to aggregate the 
interfering field strength at the DTV receiver from the actual wireless 
base stations to be deployed post-auction using the RSS method.
    11. The Commission proposes to specify in OET-74 the same D/U and 
OFR ratios adopted in the Second Report & Order for predicting 
interference from wireless base stations to DTV reception during the 
auction. For the reasons stated in the Second Report & Order, the 
Commission believes the same values adopted there are appropriate to 
use as the thresholds for predicting interference in the post-auction 
environment. The Commission requests comment on this proposal.
    12. The Commission proposes to require that a 600 MHz Band wireless 
licensee perform an interference analysis using the methodology in OET-
74 prior to deploying a base station for co-channel or adjacent-channel 
operations with the televisions stations within the set culling 
distance. The Commission anticipates that wireless providers will use 
their own network planning software to process the OET-

[[Page 76285]]

74 studies, but the Commission's TVStudy software would be made 
available for this purpose as well. Before deploying a new base station 
or making changes to existing base stations located within the 
specified OET-74 culling distances for co-channel or adjacent-channel 
operations with a television station, a wireless licensee would have to 
update its interference analysis to ensure that the RSS evaluations are 
up-to-date and accurate. The wireless licensee would be required to 
retain the latest copy of its interference analysis for each co-channel 
or adjacent-channel Partial Economic Area (PEA) license area where any 
of its base stations fall within the specified OET-74 culling distances 
and make the analysis available to the Commission or a subject 
television station upon request in cases where there are complaints of 
interference either from the subject television station, a station 
viewer or the Commission. The Commission seeks comment on these 
proposals.
Case 4: Interference From Wireless User Equipment to Broadcast 
Television Stations Assigned to the 600 MHz Uplink Spectrum
    13. If broadcast television stations are assigned to channels in 
the 600 MHz Band uplink spectrum, the Commission proposes to restrict 
wireless user equipment (i.e. mobile and portable devices) operating on 
co-channel or adjacent-channel frequencies to areas outside the 
separation distances from the DTV station contours adopted in the 
Second Report & Order. First, for co-channel operations, the Commission 
proposes to not allow wireless user equipment to operate within the 
television station's contour and within five kilometers of that 
contour. Second, for adjacent channel operations, the Commission 
proposes to restrict user equipment operation within the contour of the 
television station and within one-half kilometer of that contour. The 
Commission proposes to limit the one-half kilometer restriction to the 
first-adjacent channel; thus, wireless user equipment could be operated 
anywhere within the contour of a broadcast television station if there 
is a frequency separation of six megahertz or more between the wireless 
spectrum block edge and a TV channel edge. The Commission seeks comment 
on the proposals for protecting DTV service from harmful interference 
caused by wireless user equipment. Wireless providers may meet the 
distance requirements by limiting their coverage area to areas that are 
at least five kilometers if co-channel with a broadcast television 
station or one-half kilometer if they are adjacent channel outside the 
noise-limited or protected contours of the broadcast television 
station. Interested parties are also invited to submit suggestions for 
alternative approaches for providing protection to broadcast television 
service that would rely on methods other than pre-calculated separation 
distances. Parties submitting such approaches should include technical 
analyses and information describing how their suggested method would 
adequately protect broadcast television services.

Proposed Obligation of Wireless Licensees To Eliminate Actual 
Interference to Television Stations in the 600 MHz Band

    14. While the Commission proposes to use a predictive model to 
prevent inter-service interference to television stations based on 
wireless base station deployments, it also proposes to require a 
wireless licensee to eliminate any actual harmful interference to 
television service in the 600 MHz Band, even if no harmful interference 
is predicted. This proposed requirement will ensure that television 
stations assigned to the 600 MHz Band are not detrimentally affected by 
being co-channel or adjacent channel to wireless operations.
    15. If a television station operating in the 600 MHz Band 
experiences harmful interference, the Commission proposes that the 
television station be required to contact the co-channel or adjacent-
channel wireless provider thought to be causing the interference to 
resolve the issue. In the event of such contact, the Commission 
proposes to require that the wireless licensee provide the television 
station with the results of its OET-74 analysis demonstrating that no 
harmful interference was predicted to occur in the specific geographic 
area at issue. In the event that the parties do not reach resolution, 
they can submit a claim of harmful interference to the Commission. The 
Commission seeks comment on these proposals.

Proposed Procedures To Prevent Inter-Service Interference

General Wireless Licensee Obligations

    16. Given the proposed rules set forth in the FNPRM, the Commission 
seeks comment on appropriate wireless licensee obligations, both with 
respect to technical requirements and service rules. Specifically, 
consistent with the guidance set forth in the Incentive Auction R&O, 
the Commission proposes that a 600 MHz Band licensee will hold a 
license for its entire PEA service area, but operations will be limited 
to the portions of the license where the licensee will not cause 
harmful interference to broadcast television stations assigned to the 
600 MHz Band. Under this proposal, a wireless licensee will be allowed 
to operate base stations at the power and out-of-band emission (OOBE) 
limits authorized by the technical rules only within the areas where it 
can demonstrate using the proposed OET-74 methodology and inputs that 
it will not cause harmful interference to a television station, even if 
the actual boundaries of the license area extend further (i.e., it may 
not operate in ``restricted'' areas). As the Commission stated in the 
Incentive Auction R&O, nothing in the rules prevents a wireless 
provider from operating in a part of its service area in which it may 
receive interference from broadcast operations (i.e., in an 
``infringed'' area). The Commission seeks comment on the obligations of 
600 MHz Band wireless licensees in operating in areas of their PEAs 
with impairments.
    17. As discussed in the Incentive Auction R&O, 600 MHz Band 
wireless licensees will be required to meet the 600 MHz Band interim 
and final build-out requirements, except that they may show they are 
unable to operate in areas where they may cause harmful interference to 
the broadcast television stations that remain in the 600 MHz Band due 
to market variation. The areas where a wireless licensee may operate 
without causing harmful interference are the ``permitted boundaries'' 
of a license area. If a licensee is not able to serve its entire 
license area, when it files its construction notification within 15 
days of the relevant milestone certifying that it has met the 
applicable performance benchmark within its permitted boundaries, the 
licensee must demonstrate why certain areas are excluded from its 
service area due to impairments. The Commission proposes to require 
that wireless licensees use the ISIX Methodology adopted in the Second 
Report & Order for prediction of interference in Cases 1, 2 and 4 and 
the methodology in proposed OET Bulletin 74 for Case 3 to demonstrate 
they cannot serve their entire PEA service area, among other evidence. 
Further, as discussed in the Incentive Auction R&O, if the impairing 
television station ceases to operate, the wireless licensee will be 
permitted to use the entire license area, and will be obligated to 
serve the area that was previously restricted in demonstrating that it 
has met its buildout requirements.
    18. Additionally, the Commission seeks comment on any additional or 
modified service rules that should be

[[Page 76286]]

applied to 600 MHz Band licensees to address the potential for inter-
service interference.

Broadcasters in the 600 MHz Band

    19. Consistent with the guidance in the Incentive Auction R&O, the 
Commission proposes not to permit broadcast licensees who operate in 
the 600 MHz Band to expand their noise-limited or protected contours if 
doing so would increase the potential for interference to a wireless 
licensee's service area. At the same time, the Commission tentatively 
concludes that broadcast television stations should be allowed to 
demonstrate non-interference to a wireless licensee's service area by 
showing that a proposed modification will not expand its contour in the 
direction of a co-channel or adjacent channel wireless licensee. This 
approach will ensure that wireless providers that acquire spectrum 
through the forward auction can rely on the information available at 
the time of the auction as to the existence and contours of a co-
channel or adjacent television station, and rely on their modeling 
using OET Bulletin 74 for as long as the such television station is 
operating. The Commission seeks comment on this proposal.
    20. The contours of broadcast television stations that will be 
reassigned to new channels in the 600 MHz Band as a result of the 
repacking process will be specified in the Channel Reassignment PN. For 
such stations to be able to engineer their modified facilities and 
quickly transition to their new channels, in the Incentive Auction R&O 
the Commission granted them a window filing priority to propose 
transmission facilities in their initial construction permit 
applications with up to a one percent coverage contour increase if 
necessary to achieve the contour coverage specified in the Channel 
Reassignment PN or to address loss of coverage area resulting from 
their new channel assignment. Consistent with that decision, for 
purposes of the proposal set forth immediately above, the Commission 
proposes that the contours of such stations be deemed to be those 
described in their initial construction permit for their new channel. 
The impact on a wireless licensee of allowing stations reassigned to 
channels in the 600 MHz Band such flexibility would be negligible 
because a one percent increase is de minimis the increase may not be in 
the direction of the wireless licensee, and the initial construction 
applications must be filed within three months of release of the 
Channel Reassignment PN. The Commission does not propose, however, that 
these stations be permitted to file for further expanded facilities on 
their new channels, unless they can demonstrate that the proposed 
expanded facility will not increase their contour in the direction of a 
wireless license area. The Commission seeks comment on these proposals.

Predicting Inter-Service Interference During the Post-Auction 
Transition Period

Predicting Interference to New 600 MHz Band Licensees From LPTV 
Stations and TV Translators for Notification Purposes

    21. In the Incentive Auction R&O, the Commission stated that during 
the Post-Auction Transition Period new 600 MHz Band wireless licensees 
intending to commences operations in areas of their licenses where 
there is a likelihood of receiving harmful interference from an LPTV or 
TV translator station, based ``on the methodology the Commission 
adopted to prevent inter-service interference,'' must provide LPTV and 
TV translator stations with advance notification that they will be 
displaced. In the Second Report & Order, the Commission adopted the 
ISIX Methodology and input values to predict interference from full 
power and Class A television stations to wireless services during the 
course of the auction.
    22. The Commission seeks comment on appropriate modifications to 
the ISIX Methodology to predict interference to 600 MHz Band wireless 
operations from LPTV and TV Translators. First, the Commission seeks 
comment on use of the field strength values below for predicting such 
interference. The interference potential of LPTV and TV Translators 
that have migrated their operations to digital is evaluated differently 
from that of full power DTV stations under the rules. In particular, 
the rules specify different values for the adjacent channel emissions 
and elevation patterns of low power and full power DTV stations. The 
Commission examined the effect of the different LPTV/TV translator 
emission masks, however, and found that the field strength thresholds 
of these masks and the full power television mask is no more than 1dB. 
Therefore, the Commission proposes to use the same field strength 
values as full power television for the interference thresholds of co-
channel and adjacent channel emissions for LPTV and TV translators to 
wireless service in the ISIX Methodology. Those thresholds are based on 
technical assumptions regarding the wireless receivers (both base 
stations and user equipment) that appear respectively in Tables 5 and 6 
in the ISIX PN, as well as Tables 3 and 4 in the Technical Appendix of 
the Second Report and Order.
    23. In addition, the Commission proposes to use the same elevation 
patterns for LPTV and TV translators as those patterns appear in the 
Consolidated Database System (CDBS). In the event the CDBS does not 
include elevation pattern values for a given low power station, it 
proposes to use the elevation patterns of LPTV and TV translators as 
they are defined in Sec.  74.793(d) of the Commission's rules.
    24. In the event a potentially interfering LPTV or TV translator 
station is operating an analog signal, the Commission invites comment 
on additional modifications to the methodology for predicting inter-
service interference that may be appropriate. One potential approach is 
to use TVStudy's capability to ``replicate'' an analog signal as an 
equivalent digital signal and analyze the station as though it were 
operating in digital. The Commission seeks comment on this approach and 
on any other potential approaches. In the event it uses the TVStudy 
approach, the Commission seeks comment on whether it should treat the 
interfering field strength of an analog television signal the same as 
an interfering digital television signal.

Wireless Operations Prior to Broadcast Television Station Relocation

    25. As set forth in the Incentive Auction R&O, wireless providers 
may commence operations prior to the end of the 39-month Post-Auction 
Transition Period, as soon as their licensed frequencies are vacated by 
any full power or Class A television stations that occupied those 
frequencies prior to the incentive auction. Because television stations 
transitioning to new channels or going off the air may be operating on 
different timetables under the rules established in the Incentive 
Auction R&O, there is a potential for inter-service interference 
between wireless providers that commence operations on frequencies that 
have been vacated by a broadcast television station in their license 
area or in part of their license area and broadcast television stations 
in nearby markets that have not transitioned yet.
    26. Accordingly, in the event that a wireless provider seeks to 
commence operations prior to the end of the 39-month Post-Auction 
Transition Period and there are co-channel or adjacent-channel 
broadcast television stations in the wireless licensee's downlink 
spectrum within the culling distances

[[Page 76287]]

specified in OET-74, the Commission proposes to require the wireless 
provider to use OET-74 to predict whether wireless operations in its 
license area or part of its license area will cause harmful 
interference to the subject television stations. The wireless licensees 
would be required to retain the latest copy of the OET-74 study for 
each co-channel or adjacent-channel PEA license area where any of their 
base stations fall within the specified OET-74 culling distances and 
make it available to the Commission and to a subject television station 
upon request if there are complaints of interference either from a 
subject television station, a member of the public or the Commission. 
The Commission seeks comment on these proposals.
    27. If there are co-channel or adjacent channel broadcast 
television stations in the wireless licensee's uplink spectrum that 
have not cleared their pre-auction channels, the Commission proposes to 
require the wireless providers to ensure that their user equipment does 
not operate in the contours and within five kilometers of the contour 
when co-channel or within a half kilometer when adjacent channel. The 
Commission seeks comment on this proposal.

Using the ISIX Methodology To Assess Interference From and to 
International Broadcast Television Stations During the Auction

    28. The Commission has engaged in extensive discussions with Canada 
and Mexico to determine interference protection along the border areas. 
At this time, both Canada and Mexico are transitioning their broadcast 
services into digital in line with their regulatory requirements. 
Because the timing of these transitions is under the control of the 
administration of the respective countries, the Commission seeks 
comment on using the ISIX Methodology and input values to identify 
impairments to wireless spectrum along the international borders during 
the auction.
    29. As noted, the ISIX Methodology adopted in the companion Second 
Report & Order item is not designed for analog signals. As Canada and 
Mexico have not completed their digital transitions, the Commission 
also seeks comment on implementing an approach similar to that proposed 
above for predicting interference from analog LPTV to wireless service. 
Specifically, in predicting interference to and from foreign analog 
broadcast television stations along the international borders, it 
proposes to use TVStudy's capability to ``replicate'' an analog signal 
as an equivalent digital signal and analyze the station as though it 
was operating as digital.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    30. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),\1\ the 
Commission has prepared this present Initial Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on small 
entities by the policies and rules proposed in this Further Notice of 
Proposed Rule Making (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 provided on the first page 
of this FNPRM. The Commission will send a copy of this FNPRM, including 
this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration (SBA).\2\ In addition, the FNPRM and IRFA (or summaries 
thereof) will be published in the Federal Register.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. 601--612, has been 
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 
1996 (SBREFA), Public Law 104-121, Title II, 110 Stat. 857 (1996).
    \2\ See 5 U.S.C. 603(a).
    \3\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules

    31. The FNPRM addresses issues that arise from the Incentive 
Auction R&O to repurpose a portion of the broadcast spectrum for new 
wireless services and proposes rules governing the interference in the 
600 MHz Band following the incentive auction.\4\ In the Incentive 
Auction R&O, the Commission adopted a flexible band plan framework that 
accommodates market variation.\5\ Market variation occurs where 
broadcast stations remain on spectrum that is repurposed for wireless 
broadband under the 600 MHz Band Plan.\6\ The FNPRM proposes rules for 
the protection of broadcast services from wireless operations in the 
600 MHz Band when co-channel or adjacent channel and for the protection 
of wireless license areas from broadcast television stations seeking to 
expand their contours. It proposes a methodology in OET Bulletin No. 74 
for predicting when a wireless base station will cause interference to 
a broadcast station. It proposes to require wireless user equipment to 
operate outside of certain separation distances from the broadcast 
station contours to avoid interference to television reception. In the 
event that wireless operations actually cause harmful interference to 
television reception in the 600 MHz Band where interference was not 
predicted to occur, the FNPRM proposes to require wireless providers to 
take action to eliminate the interference. The FNPRM seeks comment on 
appropriate wireless licensee obligations, both with respect to 
technical requirements and service rules. The FNPRM also proposes to 
adopt the ISIX Methodology to predict whether LPTV or TV Translators 
will cause interference to a wireless system in the 600 MHz Band. The 
FNPRM also proposes use of the ISIX Methodology and inputs, as detailed 
in the proposed OET-74, for ensuring that wireless services that are 
deployed during the 39-month transition period do not cause 
interference to broadcast television stations that have not yet 
transitioned to their final channel assignments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Expanding the Economic and Innovation Opportunities of 
Spectrum Through Incentive Auctions, GN Docket No. 12-268, Report 
and Order, 29 FCC Rcd 6567 (2014) (Incentive Auction R&O).
    \5\ Incentive Auction R&O, 29 FCC Rcd at 6605, para. 82 
(discussing how the 600 MHz Band Plan can accommodate market 
variation to avoid restricting the amount of repurposed spectrum 
that is available in most areas nationwide).
    \6\ See Incentive Auction R&O, 29 FCC Rcd at 6604-6607, paras. 
81-87.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Legal Basis

    32. The proposed action is authorized under sections 1, 4, 301, 
303, 307, 308, 309, 310, 316, 319, 332, and 403 of the Communications 
Act of 1934, as amended, and sections 6004, 6402, 6403, 6404, and 6407 
of Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, Public Law 
112-96, 126 Stat. 156, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154, 301, 303, 307, 308, 309, 
310, 316, 319, 332, 403, 1404, 1452, and 1454.

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

    33. 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.\7\ The RFA generally 
defines the term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the 
terms ``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small 
governmental jurisdiction.'' \8\ In addition, the term ``small 
business'' has the same meaning as the term ``small business concern'' 
under the Small Business Act.\9\ A small

[[Page 76288]]

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.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 5 U.S.C. 603(b)(3).
    \8\ 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
    \9\ 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (incorporating by reference the definition 
of ``small business concern'' in 15 U.S.C. 632). Pursuant to the 
RFA, the statutory definition of a small business applies ``unless 
an agency, after consultation with the Office of Advocacy of the 
Small Business Administration and after opportunity for public 
comment, establishes one or more definitions of such term which are 
appropriate to the activities of the agency and publishes such 
definition(s) in the Federal Register.'' 5 U.S.C. 601(3).
    \10\ Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632 (1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    34. Television Broadcasting. This economic census category 
``comprises establishments primarily engaged in broadcasting images 
together with sound. These establishments operate television 
broadcasting studios and facilities for the programming and 
transmission of programs to the public.'' \11\ The SBA has created the 
following small business size standard for Television Broadcasting 
firms: those having $38.5 million or less in annual receipts.\12\ The 
Commission has estimated the number of licensed commercial television 
stations to be 1,388.\13\ In addition, according to Commission staff 
review of the BIA Advisory Services, LLC's Media Access Pro Television 
Database on March 28, 2012, about 950 of an estimated 1,300 commercial 
television stations (or approximately 73 percent) had revenues of $38.5 
million or less.\14\ We therefore estimate that the majority of 
commercial television broadcasters are small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ U.S. Census Bureau, 2012 NAICS Definitions: 515120 
Television Broadcasting, http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/sssd/naics/naicsrch?code=515120&search=2012 (last visited Mar. 6, 2014).
    \12\ 13 CFR 121.201 (NAICS code 515120) (updated for inflation 
in 2010).
    \13\ See FCC News Release, Broadcast Station Totals as of 
December 31, 2013 (rel. Jan. 8, 2014), http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2014/db0108/DOC-325039A1.pdf.
    \14\ We recognize that BIA's estimate differs slightly from the 
FCC total given the information provided above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    35. We note, however, that in assessing whether a business concern 
qualifies as small under the above definition, business (control) 
affiliations must be included.\15\ Our estimate, therefore, likely 
overstates the number of small entities that might be affected by our 
action because the revenue figure on which it is based does not include 
or aggregate revenues from affiliated companies. In addition, an 
element of the definition of ``small business'' is that the entity not 
be dominant in its field of operation. We are unable at this time to 
define or quantify the criteria that would establish whether a specific 
television station is dominant in its field of operation. Accordingly, 
the estimate of small businesses to which rules may apply does not 
exclude any television station from the definition of a small business 
on this basis and is therefore possibly over-inclusive to that extent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ ``[Business concerns] are affiliates of each other when one 
concern controls or has the power to control the other, or a third 
party or parties controls or has the power to control both.'' 13 CFR 
121.103(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    36. In addition, the Commission has estimated the number of 
licensed noncommercial educational (``NCE'') television stations to be 
395.\16\ These stations are non-profit, and therefore considered to be 
small entities.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See FCC News Release, Broadcast Station Totals as of 
December 31, 2013 (rel. Jan. 8, 2014), http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2014/db0108/DOC-325039A1.pdf.
    \17\ See generally 5 U.S.C. 601(4), (6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    37. There are also 2,414 LPTV stations, including Class A stations, 
and 4,046 TV translator stations.\18\ Given the nature of these 
services, we will presume that all of these entities qualify as small 
entities under the above SBA small business size standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See FCC News Release, Broadcast Station Totals as of 
December 31, 2013 (rel. January 8, 2014), http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2014/db0108/DOC-325039A1.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    38. Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications 
Equipment Manufacturing. The Census Bureau defines this category as 
follows: ``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 developed a small business size 
standard for Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless 
Communications Equipment Manufacturing, which is: All such firms having 
750 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 2007, there 
were a total of 939 establishments in this category that operated for 
part or all of the entire year. Of this total, 912 had less than 500 
employees and 17 had more than 1000 employees. Thus, under that size 
standard, the majority of firms can be considered small.
    39. Audio and Video Equipment Manufacturing. The SBA has classified 
the manufacturing of audio and video equipment under in NAICS Codes 
classification scheme as an industry in which a manufacturer is small 
if it has less than 750 employees. Data contained in the 2007 U.S. 
Census indicate that 492 establishments operated in that industry for 
all or part of that year. In that year, 488 establishments had fewer 
than 500 employees; and only 1 had more than 1000 employees. Thus, 
under the applicable size standard, a majority of manufacturers of 
audio and video equipment may be considered small.
    40. Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except satellite). The 
Census Bureau defines this category as follows: ``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 phone services, paging 
services, wireless Internet access, and wireless video services.'' \19\ 
The appropriate size standard under SBA rules is for the category 
Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite). The size 
standard for that category is that a business is small if it has 1,500 
or fewer employees.\20\ For this category, census data for 2007 show 
that there were 1,383 firms that operated for the entire year.\21\ Of 
this total, 1,368 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees and 15 
had employment of 1000 employees or more.\22\ Similarly, according to 
Commission data, 413 carriers reported that they were engaged in the 
provision of wireless telephony, including cellular service, PCS, and 
Specialized Mobile Radio (``SMR'') Telephony services.\23\ Of these, an 
estimated 261 have 1,500 or fewer employees and 152 have more than 
1,500 employees.\24\ Consequently, the Commission estimates that 
approximately half or more of these firms can be considered small. 
Thus, using available data, we estimate that the majority of wireless 
firms can be considered small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ U.S. Census Bureau, 2012 NAICS Definitions: 517210 Wireless 
Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite), http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/sssd/naics/naicsrch?code=517210&search=2012 
(last visited Mar. 6, 2014).
    \20\ 13 CFR 121.201 (NAICS code 517210).
    \21\ U.S. Census Bureau, Table No. EC0751SSSZ5, Information: 
Subject Series--Establishment and Firm Size: Employment Size of 
Firms for the United States: 2007 (NAICS code 517210), http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ECN_2007_US_51SSSZ5.
    \22\ Id. Available census data do not provide a more precise 
estimate of the number of firms that have employment of 1,500 or 
fewer employees; the largest category provided is for firms with 
1000 employees or more.
    \23\ See Trends in Telephone Service at Table 5.3.
    \24\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    41. This FNPRM proposes to establish the following reporting, 
recordkeeping, and compliance requirements. All wireless providers that 
hold licenses to

[[Page 76289]]

operate co-channel or adjacent channel to a television station would 
perform an interference analysis using the methodology in OET-74 prior 
to deploying a base station within the set culling distance. The rule 
proposes that wireless licensees retain the latest copy of its 
interference analysis for each co-channel or adjacent channel Partial 
Economic Area (PEA) license area where any of its base stations fall 
within the specified OET-74 culling distances and make the analysis 
available to the Commission or a subject television station upon 
request in cases where there are complaints of interference from either 
the subject television station, a station viewer or the Commission. In 
addition, in the event that a television station and a 600 MHz Band 
wireless licensee do not reach resolution of an interference complaint, 
this FNPRM proposes that they can submit a claim of harmful 
interference to the Commission. This FNPRM also proposes that when a 
600 MHz Band wireless licensee files a construction notification, it 
use the ISIX Methodology for certain interference cases and the 
methodology in proposed OET Bulletin 74 in another interference case to 
demonstrate that it cannot serve its entire PEA service area, among 
other evidence. This FNPRM also tentatively concludes that broadcast 
licensees who operate in the 600 MHz Band can demonstrate non-
interference to a wireless licensee's service area by showing that a 
proposed modification will not expand its contour in the direction of a 
co-channel or adjacent channel wireless licensee. This FNPRM also 
proposes that, in the event that a wireless provider seeks to commence 
operations prior to the end of the 39-month transition period and there 
are co-channel or adjacent-channel broadcast television stations in the 
wireless licensee's downlink spectrum within the culling distances 
specified in OET-74, the wireless provider will use OET-74 to predict 
whether its operations will cause harmful interference to the subject 
television stations. This FNPRM proposes to require the wireless 
licensee to retain the latest copy of the OET-74 study and make it 
available to the Commission and to a subject television station upon 
request if there are complaints of interference either from a subject 
television station, a member of the public, or the Commission.

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

    42. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant 
alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach, 
which may include the following four alternatives (among others): (1) 
The establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or 
timetables that take into account the resources available to small 
entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of 
compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for 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 small 
entities.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See 5 U.S.C. 603(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    43. The proposed reporting, recordkeeping, and compliance 
requirements will apply to all entities in the same manner. The 
Commission believes that applying the same rules equally to all 
entities in this context promotes fairness. The Commission does not 
believe that the costs and/or administrative burdens associated with 
the rules will unduly burden small entities. Wireless providers may use 
either the Commission's TVStudy software available for free online at 
http://data.fcc.gov/download/incentive-auctions/OET-69/ or their own 
network planning software in which they can incorporate the Longley-
Rice Fortran Code included with the TVStudy source code, to perform the 
OET-74 analysis.

F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the 
Proposed Rule

    44. None.

Procedural Matters

Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis

    45. This FNPRM contains proposed information collection 
requirements. The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to 
reduce paperwork burdens, invites the general public and the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) to comment on the information collection 
requirements contained in this document, as required by the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. In addition, pursuant to the 
Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 
U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), the Commission seeks specific comment on how it 
might further reduce the information collection burden for small 
business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.

Ordering Clauses

    46. Pursuant to the authority found in sections 1, 4, 301, 303, 
307, 308, 309, 310, 316, 319, 332, and 403 of the Communications Act of 
1934, as amended, and sections 6004, 6402, 6403, 6404, and 6407 of 
Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, Public Law 112-
96, 126 Stat. 156, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154, 301, 303, 307, 308, 309, 310, 
316, 319, 332, 4031404, 1452, and 1454, and 1.2 of the Commission's 
rules, 47 CFR 1.2, the Second Report and Order and Further Notice of 
Proposed Rule Making is adopted.
    47. The Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, 
Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of this Second Report 
and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in GN Docket No. 
12-268, including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the 
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR part 27 and 73

    Communications equipment, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR parts 27 and 73 as 
follows:

PART 27--MISCELLANEOUS WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES

0
1. The authority citation of part 27 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  47 U.S.C. 154, 301, 302(a), 303, 307, 309, 332, 336, 
337, 1403, 1404, 1451, and 1452 unless otherwise noted.
0
2. Section 27.1310 is added to read as follows:

Subpart N--600 MHz Band


Sec.  27.1310  Protection of Broadcast Television Service in the 600 
MHz Band from Wireless Operations.

    (a) Licensees authorized to operate wireless services in the 600 
MHz band must cause no harmful interference to public reception of the 
signal of broadcast television stations transmitting co-channel or on 
the adjacent channel.
    (1) Such wireless operations must comply with the D/U ratios in 
Tables 7-13 in OET Bulletin No. 74. Copies of OET Bulletin No. 74 may 
be inspected during normal business hours at the Federal Communications 
Commission, 445 12th St. SW., Reference Information Center (Room CY 
A257), Washington, DC 20554. This document is also available through 
the Internet on the FCC Home Page at http://www.fcc.gov.

[[Page 76290]]

    (2) If the 600 MHz band licensee causes harmful interference to the 
public reception of a signal of a broadcast television station that is 
operating co-channel or on an adjacent channel, that licensee must 
eliminate the harmful interference.
    (b) Licensees authorized to operate wireless services in the 600 
MHz band:
    (1) Are not permitted to deploy wireless base stations within 
noise-limited service contour or protected contour of a broadcast 
television station licensed on a co-channel or adjacent channel in the 
600 MHz Band, and
    (2) Are required to perform studies to evaluate the potential for 
their operations to cause harmful interference to public reception of 
the signal of such broadcast television station using the methodology 
in OET Bulletin No. 74 when they intend to deploy wireless base 
stations within the culling distances from the noise-limited contour or 
protected contour of a broadcast television station licensed on a co-
channel or adjacent channel in the 600 MHz band specified in OET 
Bulletin No. 74. Licensees shall maintain records of those studies and 
make them available for inspection upon a claim of harmful interference 
to the requesting broadcasting television station or the Commission.
    (c) Mobile and portable devices that operate in the 600 MHz band 
shall afford protection to co-channel and adjacent channel broadcast 
television stations in the following manner:
    (1) By maintaining a minimum distance of 5 kilometers (3 miles) 
from co-channel broadcast television station noise-limited service or 
protected contours.
    (2) By maintaining a minimum distance of 500 meters from adjacent-
channel broadcast television station noise-limited service or protected 
contours (3) by not operating within the contours of a broadcast 
television station that is operating co-channel or adjacent channel.
    (3) Licensees authorized to operate wireless services in the 600 
MHz band may meet the requirements of this subparagraph by limiting 
their coverage to areas at least the distance prescribed by paragraphs 
(c)(1) through (3) outside all noise-limited service or protected 
contours from co-channel or adjacent broadcast television stations.
    (d) For purposes of this section, broadcast television station is 
defined pursuant to Sec.  73.3700(a)(1) of this chapter.
    (e) For purposes of this section, co-channel operations in the 600 
MHz band are defined as operations of broadcast television stations and 
wireless services where their assigned channels spectrally overlap. 
Adjacent channel operations are defined as operations of broadcast 
television stations and wireless services where their assigned channels 
spectrally abut each other or are separated by up to 5 MHz.

PART 73--RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES

0
3. The authority citation of part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336, and 339.
0
4. Sections 73.3700 is amended by adding paragraph (i) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  73.3700   Post-incentive auction aicensing and operation.

* * * * *
    (i) A broadcast television station licensed in the 600 MHz band, as 
that is defined in Sec.  27.57(l),
    (1) Shall not be permitted to modify its facilities, if such 
modification will expand the noise limited service contour of a full 
power station or the protected contour of a Class A station in the 
direction of a wireless license area which is co-channel or adjacent 
channel to the broadcast television station;
    (2) May request a waiver of paragraph (a), if
    (i) A modification of the facilities is caused by extraordinary 
circumstances outside the broadcast television station's control, or
    (ii) The broadcast television station cannot replicate its service 
area on the reassigned channel following the publication of the Channel 
Reassignment Public Notice.

Proposed OET Bulletin No. 74; Longley-Rice Methodology for Predicting 
Inter-Service Interference to Broadcast Television From Mobile Wireless 
Broadband Services in the UHF Band

I. Introduction

    This Bulletin provides the methodology for prediction of 
interference from fixed wireless base stations in the 600 MHz downlink 
spectrum to digital full-power and Class A television service areas 
that operate co-channel or adjacent-channel to mobile wireless 
broadband operations. The methodology provides guidance on the 
implementation and use of the NTIA Institute for Telecommunications 
Science's Longley-Rice radio propagation model for predicting inter-
service interference (ISIX) to broadcast television from mobile 
wireless broadband services. For broadcast television, this methodology 
assumes use of the Advanced Television Systems Committee's (ATSC) 
Digital Television (DTV) Standard, although it is possible, especially 
across U.S. international borders, that the National Television Systems 
Committee (NTSC) analog Television (TV) standard may also be used. 
Consideration of interference predictions from fixed wireless base 
stations to analog television service areas is outside of the scope of 
this Bulletin.
    The methodology uses the Longley-Rice model for predicting field 
strength at receive points based on the elevation profile of terrain 
between the transmitter and each specific reception point. The 
methodology described in this Bulletin generates predictions over large 
areas using the broadcast mode. For practical reasons, a computer is 
needed to make these predictions because of the large amount of data 
required for each calculation. Computer code for Version 1.2.2 of the 
Longley-Rice radio propagation model (Longley-Rice model) is available 
at http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/resources/radio-propagation-software/itm/itm.aspx.

II. Evaluation of Service

    The service areas subject to interference calculation are defined 
in the FCC rules for both digital full-power and Class A television 
stations; the rules also specify standards for determining interference 
to DTV service. Because wireless services are expected to be noise-like 
and studies have shown that noise-like signals have interference 
potential nearly identical to DTV, interference protection criteria 
similar to those currently used for DTV-to-DTV can generally be applied 
with some adjustments as discussed below.
    For digital full-power television stations, service is evaluated 
inside the noise-limited contour defined in 47 CFR 73.622(e) with the 
exception that the defining field strength threshold for UHF channels 
is modified by subtracting a frequency-dependent dipole antenna 
adjustment factor. Thus, the area subject to interference calculation 
for digital full-power TV stations consists of the area within the 
contours described by the geographic points at which the field strength 
predicted for 50% of locations and 90% of the time by FCC curves is at 
least as great as 41--20log<INF>10</INF>[615/(channel mid-frequency in 
MHz)].
    For digital Class A TV stations, service is protected only inside 
the ``protected contour'' defined in 47 CFR 73.6010(c), with the 
exception that the defining field strength threshold for UHF channels 
is modified by subtracting a frequency-dependent dipole antenna 
adjustment factor. Thus,

[[Page 76291]]

the area subject to interference calculation for digital Class A TV 
stations consists of the area within the contours described by the 
geographic points at which the field strength predicted for 50% of 
locations and 90% of time by FCC curves is at least as great as 51--
20log<INF>10</INF>[615/(channel mid-frequency in MHz)].
    The service area subject to interference calculation is divided 
into trapezoidal cells approximately 2 kilometers on a side across a 
global grid. The Longley-Rice propagation model Version 1.2.2 is 
applied between the DTV transmitter site and a point in each cell to 
determine whether the predicted desired field strength is above the 
values identified above, for each digital full-power or Class A TV 
station, respectively, based on the TV station's operating channel. For 
cells with population, the point chosen is the population centroid, as 
determined using the method implemented in the FCC's TVStudy software 
implementing the Longley-Rice model--otherwise the point chosen is the 
geometric center of the cell and the point so determined represents the 
entire cell in all subsequent service and interference calculations. 
The station's directional transmitting antenna patterns (azimuth and 
elevation), if applicable, are taken into account in determining the 
effective radiated power (ERP) in the direction of each cell.
    Longley-Rice parameter settings for the calculations specified in 
this Bulletin are shown in table below.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Parameter                  Value           Meaning/comment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPS...........................  15.0.............  Relative permittivity
                                                    of ground.
SGM (S/m).....................  0.005............  Ground conductivity.
ZSYS..........................  0.0..............  General System
                                                    Elevation.
                                                    Coordinated with
                                                    setting of EN0.
EN0 (ppm).....................  301.0............  Surface refractivity
                                                    in N-units.
IPOL..........................  0................  Denotes horizontal
                                                    polarization.
MDVAR.........................  3................  Calculation Mode
                                                    (Broadcast).
KLIM..........................  5................  Climate Code
                                                    (Continental
                                                    Temperate).
XI (km).......................  0.1..............  Terrain sampling
                                                    interval.
HG(1) (m).....................  30...............  Height of the
                                                    radiation center
                                                    above ground.
HG(2) (m).....................  10...............  Height of DTV
                                                    receiver above
                                                    ground.
Time variability (desired       90%
 signal).
Time variability (undesired     10%
 signal).
Location variability..........  50%
Confidence variability........  50%..............  (Also called
                                                    situational
                                                    variability)
Error Code (KWX = 3)..........  Ignore...........  Accept the path loss
                                                    value that is
                                                    returned by Longley-
                                                    Rice code.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: HG(1) is the height of the wireless transmitting antenna radiation
  center above ground at its specific geographic coordinates, which may
  be determined by subtracting the ground elevation above mean sea level
  (AMSL) at the transmitter location from the height of the antenna
  radiation center AMSL. However, if ground elevation is retrieved from
  the terrain elevation database as a function of the transmitter site
  coordinates, then bilinear interpolation between the surrounding data
  points in the terrain database shall be used to determine the ground
  elevation. Care should be used to ensure that consistent horizontal
  and vertical datums are employed among all data sets.

III. Evaluation of Interference

A. Application of the Longley-Rice Model To Determine Interfering 
Signal Strength

    The presence or absence of interference in each grid cell of the 
area subject to calculation is determined by further application of the 
Longley-Rice model. Radio paths between undesired transmitters and each 
global 2-kilometer grid point inside the service area are examined. The 
undesired transmitters included in the analysis of each cell are those 
which are possible sources of interference at that cell, considering 
their distance from the cell and frequency relationships. For each such 
radio path, the Longley-Rice model is applied for median situations 
(that is, confidence 50%), for 50% of locations, 10% of the time for 
the prediction of potential interference to TV receivers. In those 
cases that error code 3 occurs, the predicted interfering field 
strength nevertheless is to be accepted in determining whether there is 
interference at that location.

B. Areas of Potential Interference

    To determine whether the placement of a wireless base station at a 
particular location would cause interference to any TV station, 
information about each site in a planned wireless base station 
deployment is required. Specifically, actual values are required for:
    <bullet> Effective radiated power (ERP),
    <bullet> geographic location, and
    <bullet> antenna height above average terrain (HAAT)
    The wireless transmit antennas may conservatively be assumed to be 
non-directional in both the azimuth and elevation directions, as these 
may be simpler to implement. However, actual antenna azimuth and 
elevation patterns for each planned wireless base station site may be 
used for increased accuracy by importing these patterns into the 
software implementing the Longley-Rice model and setting the azimuth 
orientation (N [deg] E, T) on a site-by-site basis.
    The interference analysis for TV reception examines only those 
cells across the global 2-kilometer grid within the area subject to 
calculation that have already been determined to have a desired field 
strength above the threshold for reception referenced above in Section 
II, as appropriate. A cell on the global 2-kilometer grid is counted as 
receiving interference to TV if the ratio of the desired field to that 
of the square root of the sum of the squares (root-sum-square, or RSS) 
of all of an individual wireless licensee's undesired wireless 
interference sources within the appropriate culling distances, defined 
below, is less than the minimum D/U threshold value for the 
corresponding spectral overlap between the TV and wireless channels. 
The comparison is made after applying the discrimination effect of the 
receiving TV antenna.

C. DTV D/U Ratios for Co-Channel and Adjacent Channel Operations

    Thresholds of interference using the ratio of desired to undesired 
field strength to protect DTV reception from wireless co-channel 
interference are computed from the following formula:

[[Page 76292]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP22DE14.000

    Because a 5 MHz wireless channel and a 6 MHz DTV channel may not 
always fully overlap, the total wireless power in the TV channel is a 
function of the degree of spectral overlap, expressed in integer 
megahertz (MHz). In Table 1, a fully co-channel scenario would 
correspond to 5 MHz of transmitter/receiver overlap, while a first-
adjacent situation would correspond to 0 MHz of overlap. Partial co-
channel overlaps correspond to values of 1, 2, 3, and 4 MHz. Negative 
overlap values define the amount of frequency separation between 
channel edges in the adjacent-channel cases. The co-channel values at 5 
MHz may be used where there is more than 5 MHz of overlap. Wireless 
operations with frequency separations more than 5 MHz between channel 
edges or distance separations greater than the culling distances beyond 
a DTV station's noise-limited or protected contour, for full-power and 
Class A stations, respectively, are not evaluated for interference 
because the probability of interference beyond those values for each 
height and/or power combination specified in Table 3 through Table 9 
below is unlikely.

                               Table 1--Calculated Off-Frequency Rejection (OFR) Values for Wireless Base Station Into DTV
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Overlap in MHz OFR (dB)          5          4          3          2          1          0          -1         -2         -3         -4         -5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Downlink into DTV..............         0        0.9        2.2        3.9        6.7       17.0         33         33         33         33         33
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The values for off-frequency rejection (OFR) were derived using 
NTIA's MSAM FDR computer program using FCC's emission limits, and DTV 
receiver performance standards published by ATSC for the first-adjacent 
channel.
    To protect DTV reception from wireless downlink interference at 
various degrees of spectral overlap, the minimum threshold D/U ratios 
are shown in Table 2. These were derived using Equation 1 and the OFR 
values from Table 1. Values of [alpha] vary for each cell and are 
determined by the predicted desired field strength in each cell, the 
DTV planning factors, and the S/N of Equation 2.

                                      Table 2--Threshold Interfering D/U Ratios for Wireless Base Station Into DTV
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Spectral Overlap (MHz)              5                4                3                2                1                0             -1 to -5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Downlink into DTV D/U Required     16.0 + [alpha]   15.1 + [alpha]   13.8 + [alpha]   12.1 + [alpha]    9.3 + [alpha]   -2.0 + [alpha]    -18 + [alpha]
 (dB)............................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. DTV Planning Factors

    The field strength values identified in Section II define the area 
subject to interference calculations for full-power and Class A UHF DTV 
stations, respectively. These field strengths are based on the DTV 
planning factors for UHF provided in OET Bulletin No. 69, which are 
assumed to characterize the equipment, including antenna systems, used 
for consumer reception at fixed locations. They determine the minimum 
field strength for DTV reception in the UHF band.
    For UHF, the dipole adjustment factor, K<INF>a</INF> = 
20log<INF>10</INF>[615/(channel mid-frequency in MHz)], is added to 
K<INF>d</INF> in each case to account for the fact that field strength 
requirements are greater for UHF channels above the geometric mean 
frequency of the historically defined UHF TV band (i.e., channels 14-
69) and smaller for UHF channels below that mean frequency. The 
geometric mean frequency, 615 MHz, is approximately the mid-frequency 
of TV channel 38. By applying the planning factors and using the 
Longley-Rice model to predict the desired field strength ``E,'' the 
predicted signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) is then calculated from the 
formula:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP22DE14.001

    The predicted S/N value associated with the field strength of the 
desired signal in each cell is used, based on the TV station's 
operating channel, to determine the applicable interference threshold 
using Table 2 and the planning factors.

E. DTV Receiving Antenna Pattern

    The TV receiving antenna is assumed to have a directional gain 
pattern which tends to discriminate against off-axis undesired 
stations. This pattern is a planning factor affecting the receiver's 
susceptibility to interference. A working group of the FCC Advisory 
Committee for Advanced Television Service chose

[[Page 76293]]

the specific form of this pattern. The discrimination, in relative 
field, provided by the assumed TV receiving pattern is a fourth-power 
cosine function of the angle between the lines joining the desired and 
undesired stations to the reception point. One of these lines goes 
directly to the desired station, the other goes to the undesired 
station. The discrimination is calculated as the fourth power of the 
cosine of the angle between these lines but never more than represented 
by the front-to-back ratio of 14 dB for UHF. When both desired and 
undesired stations are on the receive antenna's boresight, the angle is 
0.0 giving a cosine of unity so that there is no discrimination. When 
the undesired station is somewhat off-axis, the cosine will be slightly 
less than unity and the resulting interference field strength is 
reduced accordingly by this value (while the desired field strength 
remains unchanged); when the undesired station is far off-axis, the 
maximum discrimination given by the 14 dB front-to-back ratio is 
attained, and the resulting interference field strength is reduced by 
14 (while the desired field strength still remains unchanged).
F. Identification of Potentially Interfering Stations
    Potential sources of interference are identified as a function of 
distance for the given ERP, HAAT, and frequency relationship in terms 
of spectral overlap of each site in a planned wireless deployment. 
Spectral overlap is defined as the frequency separation between channel 
edges of a wireless block and DTV channel. For wireless bandwidths 
larger or smaller than 5 MHz, interference evaluations need only 
consider the separation between the occupied portions of each 5 MHz 
block.
    The interference analysis is performed independently for each cell 
in the DTV service area subject to calculation. Only those wireless 
base stations with transmitter sites at distances less than the culling 
distance (corresponding to the wireless base station ERP, HAAT, and 
spectral overlap) from the edge of a DTV station noise-limited or 
protected contour are to be considered in the interference analysis. 
Table 3 through Table 9 specify these culling distances, which were 
derived based on the distance to the UHF F(50,10) {OFR (dB) + 18{time}  
dB[micro]V/m contour, depending on the OFR for each spectral overlap 
case.

                                     Table 3--Culling Distances (in km) From DTV Noise-Limited or Protected Contour
                                                               (spectral overlap >= 5 MHz)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                           ERP (kW) per 5 MHz block:
                      HAAT  (m):                      --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           5          4          3          2          1         0.75       0.5        0.25       0.1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
305..................................................        209        204        196        186        169        163        153        136        115
200..................................................        197        191        183        174        158        151        141        125        104
150..................................................        190        184        178        168        152        145        135        119         98
100..................................................        183        178        171        160        144        137        127        111         91
80...................................................        180        174        166        156        140        133        123        107         86
65...................................................        176        170        163        153        137        130        120        104         83
50...................................................        172        167        159        150        133        126        117        100         80
35...................................................        168        162        155        145        129        122        113         97         76
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                     Table 4--Culling Distances (in km) From DTV Noise-Limited or Protected Contour
                                                               [spectral overlap = 4 MHz]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                           ERP (kW) per 5 MHz block:
                      HAAT (m):                       --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           5          4          3          2          1         0.75       0.5        0.25       0.1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
305..................................................        205        199        192        181        166        159        148        132        111
200..................................................        192        186        179        169        153        146        137        121        100
150..................................................        185        180        173        164        147        140        131        115         94
100..................................................        179        173        166        156        139        132        123        107         86
80...................................................        175        169        162        152        136        128        119        103         82
65...................................................        171        166        158        149        132        125        116         99         79
50...................................................        168        162        155        146        129        122        112         96         76
35...................................................        163        158        151        141        125        118        108         92         73
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                     Table 5--Culling Distances (in km) From DTV Noise-Limited or Protected Contour
                                                               [spectral overlap = 3 MHz]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                           ERP (kW) per 5 MHz block:
                      HAAT (m):                       --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           5          4          3          2          1         0.75       0.5        0.25       0.1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
305..................................................        197        191        183        173        158        150        141        124        104
200..................................................        183        178        171        162        146        139        129        113         93
150..................................................        178        172        166        156        140        133        123        108         87
100..................................................        171        165        158        149        131        124        116        100         79
80...................................................        167        161        154        145        127        121        112         96         75
65...................................................        163        158        151        142        125        118        108         92         73
50...................................................        159        154        148        138        121        114        105         89         70
35...................................................        155        150        143        133        117        110        101         85         66
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 76294]]


                                     Table 6--Culling Distances (in km) From DTV Noise-Limited or Protected Contour
                                                               [spectral overlap = 2 MHz]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                           ERP (kW) per 5 MHz block:
                      HAAT (m):                       --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           5          4          3          2          1         0.75       0.5        0.25       0.1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
305..................................................        187        181        174        166        148        141        132        116         97
200..................................................        174        170        163        153        137        130        121        105         86
150..................................................        169        164        157        147        131        124        115         99         80
100..................................................        161        156        149        140        123        116        107         91         73
80...................................................        157        152        146        136        119        112        103         87         69
65...................................................        154        149        143        132        116        109        100         84         66
50...................................................        151        146        139        129        112        105         96         81         63
35...................................................        146        141        134        125        108        102         92         77         60
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                     Table 7--Culling Distances (in km) From DTV Noise-Limited or Protected Contour
                                                               [spectral overlap = 1 MHz]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                           ERP (kW) per 5 MHz block:
                      HAAT (m):                       --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           5          4          3          2          1         0.75       0.5        0.25       0.1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
305..................................................        171        166        160        149        133        126        116        102         87
200..................................................        159        154        147        138        121        115        105         91         75
150..................................................        153        148        141        131        116        109        100         85         69
100..................................................        146        140        133        123        108        101         92         77         63
80...................................................        142        136        129        120        104         97         88         73         60
65...................................................        139        133        126        116        100         94         84         71         57
50...................................................        135        130        123        113         97         90         81         67         54
35...................................................        131        125        119        109         93         87         78         64         51
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                     Table 8--Culling Distances (in km) From DTV Noise-Limited or Protected Contour
                                                               [spectral overlap = 0 MHz]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                           ERP (kW) per 5 MHz block:
                      HAAT (m):                       --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           5          4          3          2          1         0.75       0.5        0.25       0.1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
305..................................................        115        110        104         97         86         82         76         68         59
200..................................................        104         99         93         85         73         70         65         59         52
150..................................................         98         93         87         79         68         65         61         55         48
100..................................................         90         85         79         72         62         59         55         49         42
80...................................................         86         81         75         69         59         56         52         46         38
65...................................................         83         78         73         66         56         53         49         43         36
50...................................................         80         75         70         62         53         50         46         40         33
35...................................................         76         72         66         59         50         46         42         35         28
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                     Table 9--Culling Distances (in km) From DTV Noise-Limited or Protected Contour
                                                             [spectral overlap <0, >=-5 MHz]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                           ERP (kW) per 5 MHz block:
                      HAAT (m):                       --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           5          4          3          2          1         0.75       0.5        0.25       0.1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
305..................................................         61         59         57         53         48         46         43         37         31
200..................................................         53         52         50         47         42         39         37         32         26
150..................................................         49         48         46         42         37         35         32         28         23
100..................................................         43         42         39         37         32         30         27         23         18
80...................................................         40         38         36         33         29         27         25         21         16
65...................................................         37         36         34         31         26         25         22         18         14
50...................................................         34         33         30         28         23         22         19         15         12
35...................................................         29         28         26         23         19         17         15         13         10
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

G. Engineering Databases

    DTV Engineering Data. Engineering data for TV stations in the U.S. 
(including full-power DTV and Class A) is available from the FCC. Data 
for individual stations can be found at http://www.fcc.gov/mb/video/tvq.html, and consolidated data for all authorized stations can be 
found at ftp://ftp.fcc.gov/pub/Bureaus/MB/Databases/cdbs/. Where more 
than one authorization exists for a particular station, the record 
associated with the facility actually operating shall be used. Where 
specific elevation pattern data are not provided in the engineering 
data, a generic elevation pattern may be used as

[[Page 76295]]

described generally in OET Bulletin No. 69 or in the rules. The generic 
elevation pattern should, however, be offset by the amount of 
electrical beam tilt specified in the CDBS.

[FR Doc. 2014-29688 Filed 12-19-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>