Federal Register | Operation of Wireless Communications Services ...

Effective March 13, 2013, except for ?? 25.263(b), 27.72(b), and 27.73(a), which contain information collection requirements that are not effective until approved by the Office of Management and Budget. The Commission will publish a document in the Federal Register announcing the effective dates for those sections. The Director of the Federal Register will approve the incorporation by reference in ? 27.73(a) concurrently with the published office of Management and Budget approval of this section.

WCS technical information: Moslem Sawez, Moslem.Sawez@fcc.gov, Mobility Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, (202) 418-8211. WCS legal information: Linda Chang, Linda.Chang@fcc.gov Mobility Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, (202) 418-1339. SDARS technical information: Chip Fleming, Chip.Fleming@fcc.gov, Engineering Branch, Satellite Division, International Bureau, (202) 418-1247. SDARS legal information: Stephen Duall, Stephen.Duall@fcc.gov, Policy Branch, Satellite Division, International Bureau, (202) 418-1103. For additional information concerning the Paperwork Reduction Act information collection requirements contained in this document, contact Linda Chang at (202) 418-1339, or via the Internet at Linda.Chang@fcc.gov and Stephen Duall at (202) 418-1103, or via the Internet at Stephen.Duall@fcc.gov.

This is a summary of the Commission's Order on Reconsideration in WT Docket No. 07-293 and IB Docket No. 95-91, FCC 12-130, adopted and released October 17, 2012. The full text of this document is available on the Commission's Internet site at www.fcc.gov. It is also available for inspection and copying during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room CY-A257), 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. The Order on Reconsideration also may be purchased from the Commission's duplication contractor, Best Copy and Printing Inc., Portals II, 445 12th St. SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554; telephone (202) 488-5300; fax (202) 488-5563; email FCC@BCPIWEB.COM.

I. Introduction and Executive Summary

1. The Order on Reconsideration in WT Docket No. 07-293 and IB Docket No. 95-91 addressed five petitions for reconsideration of the 2010 WCS R&O and SDARS 2nd R&O, 75 FR 45058, August 2, 2010, filed by ARRL, the national association for Amateur Radio (ARRL), AT Inc. (AT), Sirius XM, Stratos Offshore Services Company (Stratos), and the WCS Coalition. The 2010 WCS R&O modified the technical rules and performance (i.e., buildout) requirements for the WCS in the 2305-2320 MHz and 2345-2360 MHz bands; the SDARS 2nd R&O established technical and licensing rules for SDARS terrestrial repeaters in the 2320-2345 MHz band. The petitions sought reconsideration, clarification, or both of the Commission's decisions in the 2010 WCS R&O and SDARS 2nd R&O regarding: (a) WCS base and fixed stations' ground level emissions limit, (b) fixed WCS customer premises equipment (CPE) power and power spectral density (PSD) limits, bands of operation, and outdoor antenna use, (c) distinction between fixed WCS CPE and fixed WCS point-to-point stations, (d) mobile and portable devices' PSD and out-of-band emissions (OOBE) limits, (e) restrictions on WCS frequency division duplexing (FDD) mobile and portable devices' bands of operation, (f) WCS mobile and portable devices' and fixed WCS CPE duty cycle limits, (g) WCS protection of Amateur Radio Service (ARS) operations and WCS base/fixed stations' and mobile devices' OOBE limits in the 2300-2305 MHz band, (h) WCS coordination, notification, and interference mitigation requirements; base station separation distance, (i) WCS performance requirements, (j) WCS/SDARS coordination zones, (k) interference protection for WCS from SDARS terrestrial repeaters, and (l) WCS and SDARS licensees' duty to cooperate in sharing information and preventing/mitigating interference. The revised rules are consistent with a June 15, 2012 compromise proposal between WCS licensee AT&T Inc. and Sirius XM designed to facilitate the efficient deployment and coexistence of the WCS and SDARS.

2. For the WCS, the Order on Reconsideration

• Established maximum design ground power level targets on roadways for WCS base and fixed station operations of -44 dBm in WCS Blocks A (2305-2310 MHz and 2350-2355 MHz) and B (2310-2315 MHz and 2355-2360 MHz) and -55 dBm in WCS Blocks C (2315-2320 MHz) and D (2345-2350 MHz) to serve as triggers for interference resolution if exceeded on roadways and harmful interference (i.e., muting) to SDARS operations occurs;
• Established conditions on roadways constituting harmful interference to SDARS operations from WCS operations requiring WCS and SDARS operators to work cooperatively to resolve;
• Denied a petition to establish a specific distance at which an SDARS subscriber is expected to tolerate muting of SDARS signals by WCS base station transmitters;
• Eliminated the frequency band restrictions on WCS FDD base stations prohibiting transmissions in the lower WCS blocks (2305-2320 MHz);
• Clarified that point-to-point and point-to-multipoint WCS fixed stations operated and controlled by the WCS licensee and that comply with the WCS base and fixed station power and emissions limits are not considered to be fixed WCS CPE;
• Denied a petition to establish reduced power limits for low-power fixed WCS CPE (i.e., CPE with average equivalent isotropically radiated power (EIRP) of 2 Watts or less) operating with the relaxed OOBE limits applicable to WCS mobile and portable devices;
• Denied a petition to establish PSD limits for all fixed WCS CPE;
• Denied a petition to establish guard bands in WCS Blocks C and D for fixed WCS CPE;
• Relaxed the restrictions on outdoor and outdoor antenna use for low-power fixed WCS CPE operating with the OOBE limits applicable to WCS mobile and portable devices under certain circumstances;
• Removed the restrictions on outdoor and outdoor antenna use for low-power fixed CPE operating with the more restrictive OOBE limits applicable to WCS base and fixed stations;
• Eliminated the PSD limits for WCS mobile and portable devices using appropriate uplink (user device to base station) transmission technology (e.g., 3rd Generation Partnership Project Long Term Evolution (3GPP LTE);
• Denied a petition requesting further restrictions on WCS mobile and portable device OOBE limits;
• Denied a petition requesting removal of the restriction prohibiting WCS mobile and portable devices using FDD technology from transmitting in the upper WCS spectrum blocks (2345-2360 MHz) adjacent to the AMT spectrum;
• Prohibited WCS mobile and portable devices from transmitting in all portions of WCS Blocks C (2315-2320 MHz) and D (2345-2350 MHz);
• Eliminated the duty cycle limits on fixed WCS CPE and WCS mobile and portable devices using FDD technology;
• Denied a petition to eliminate the 38 percent duty cycle limit for fixed WCS CPE and WCS mobile and portable devices using time division duplexing (TDD) technology;
• Clarified the bands of applicability for WCS base, fixed, and fixed CPE station, and WCS mobile and portable device OOBE limits;
• Declined to address a petition regarding the interference protection rights of secondary Amateur Radio Service operations in the 2300-2305 MHz band adjacent to primary WCS operations in the 2305-2320 MHz band;
• Exempted low-power WCS stations (EIRP less than 2 Watts) from the WCS licensee notification requirements and relaxed the WCS licensee notification requirements for minor WCS station modifications;
• Clarified that WCS fixed stations are part of the WCS licensee coordination and notification processes;
• Lengthened by 6 months and restarted the WCS construction periods to enable WCS licensees to respond to the rule revisions;
• Denied petitions to eliminate the automatic WCS license forfeiture provisions for failure to comply with the WCS performance requirements;
• Denied petitions to replace the coverage-based performance requirements for WCS Blocks C (2315-2320 MHz) and D (2345-2350 MHz) with substantial service requirements;
• Encouraged WCS licensees to enter into coordination agreements with SDARS licensees for interference mitigation.

3. For the SDARS, the Order on Reconsideration

• Denied a petition to modify the site-by-site licensing procedures for high power SDARS terrestrial repeaters that are not eligible for blanket licensing (e.g., repeaters with average EIRP greater than 12 kilowatts (kW));
• Maintained the option to authorize SDARS terrestrial repeaters that are not eligible for blanket licensing;
• Modified the definition of which WCS licensees would be potentially affected by SDARS terrestrial repeaters operating with high power or relaxed OOBE limits;
• Excepted low-power terrestrial repeaters (i.e., repeaters with EIRP less than 2 Watts) from SDARS licensee notification requirements;
• Relaxed SDARS licensee notification requirements for minor modifications to SDARS terrestrial repeaters;
• Encouraged SDARS licensees to enter into coordination agreements with WCS licensees for interference mitigation.

A. WCS Base and Fixed Stations

4. Emissions and Circumstances Requiring Coordination to Resolve Interference. To foster deployment of innovative broadband services in the WCS spectrum and further mitigate the risk of harmful interference to SDARS operations, the Order on Reconsideration adopted AT&T's and Sirius XM's proposed roadway signal levels and harmful interference conditions to SDARS operations on roadways which would trigger coordinated efforts between WCS and SDARS licensees to mitigate the interference. Specifically, WCS and SDARS operators would work cooperatively to resolve harmful interference in a location where a WCS signal level is present on a roadway at a level greater than ?44 dBm in the WCS A or B Blocks, or ?55 dBm in the WCS C or D Blocks, and a test demonstrates that the SDARS customer would be muted over a road distance of greater than 50 meters; or for a mutually agreeable drive test route, if the ground signal level on roadways exceeds ?44 dBm in the WCS A or B Blocks, or ?55 dBm in the WCS C or D Blocks, for more than 1 percent of the cumulative surface road distance on that drive route, and a test demonstrates that the SDARS customer would be muted over a cumulative road distance of greater than1/2of 1 percent (incremental to any muting present prior to use of WCS frequencies in the area of that drive test). The Order on Reconsideration denied Sirius XM's petition to establish a specific separation distance at which an SDARS subscriber is expected to tolerate muting by WCS base station operations.

5. Bands of Operation. To provide WCS licensees with more flexibility to enhance service to the public and support FDD downlink carrier aggregation, in response to AT&T's request in its petition for reconsideration and consistent with AT&T's and Sirius XM's request in their June 15, 2012 joint submission, the Commission decided in the Order on Reconsideration that WCS FDD base stations may also transmit in the lower WCS blocks at 2305-2320 MHz in addition to operating in the upper WCS bands at 2345-2360 MHz, subject to the power and OOBE attenuation factors adopted for WCS base station operations in those bands. The Commission agreed with AT&T and Sirius XM that such operations would not increase the potential for harmful interference to adjacent-band services and there is no need to restrict their operation to the upper WCS bands (2345-2360 MHz).

6. Point-To-Point/Point-To-Multipoint Station Description Clarification. In the Order on Reconsideration, the Commission agreed with Stratos and the WCS Coalition that fixed WCS point-to-point stations that are controlled and operated by the WCS licensee and comply with the power levels and spectral mask (i.e., OOBE limits) applicable to WCS base and fixed stations are not considered to be fixed WCS CPE, regardless of where the transmission equipment is installed. In addition, because fixed WCS CPE stations' operations commenced several years before the Commission adopted the 2010 WCS R&O in May 2010, and the Commission has not received reports of harmful interference to SDARS receivers due to their operation, the Commission decided that testing of all potential fixed WCS CPE applications, as suggested by Sirius XM, was not needed to clarify that fixed WCS point-to-point and point-to-multipoint stations that are controlled and operated by the WCS licensee and comply with the power levels and spectral mask applicable to WCS base and fixed stations are not considered to be fixed WCS CPE. Therefore, the Order on Reconsideration clarified that fixed WCS fixed WCS point-to-point stations and point-to-multipoint stations that are controlled and operated by the WCS licensee and that comply with the more restrictive OOBE attenuation factors applicable to WCS base and fixed stations are not considered to be fixed WCS CPE, regardless of where the equipment is installed.

B. Fixed WCS Customer Premises Equipment

7. Power and Power Spectral Density Limits. The signal attenuation from the propagation losses due to the likely separation distances between low-power fixed WCS CPE and SDARS receivers, coupled with the requirement to employ automatic transmit power control (ATPC), which is used to prevent inter-cell interference (i.e., interference to adjacent cells base stations receiving on the same frequencies), will help limit the potential for harmful interference (i.e., interference which seriously degrades, obstructs, or repeatedly interrupts a radiocommunication service) from fixed WCS CPE to SDARS receivers receiving unwanted energy in the adjacent band. Thus, the Commission disagreed with Sirius XM that low-power fixed WCS CPE operating with the OOBE attenuation factors applicable to WCS mobile devices should be restricted to a maximum EIRP of 250 mW. In addition, although most 2.3 GHz-band fixed WCS CPE devices have been authorized for and are operating at 1 to 2 W EIRP, and some fixed WCS CPE devices have been authorized for and are operating at up to 20 W EIRP, which occurred before we relaxed the OOBE limits for fixed WCS CPE, SDARS licensees have not reported any instances of harmful interference due to this fixed WCS CPE. For these reasons, the Commission decided that maintaining the average EIRP at 2 W or less for low-power fixed WCS CPE operating with the same OOBE limits as WCS mobile and portable devices will not result in harmful interference to SDARS receivers. Therefore, the Order on Reconsideration declined to restrict the maximum allowed power of low-power fixed WCS CPE operating with the same OOBE limits as WCS mobile and portable devices to 250 mW, and denied that portion of Sirius XM's petition.

8. Furthermore, because imposition of a PSD limit on fixed WCS CPE would likely preclude the provision of fixed WCS services by making it uneconomical to provide the necessary base station coverage, the Commission also declined to impose a PSD limit of 4 W/MHz on fixed WCS CPE, as requested by Sirius XM. In support of this decision, the Commission noted that the 2010 WCS R&O significantly reduced the potential for fixed WCS CPE to cause harmful interference to SDARS receivers by reducing the maximum allowed EIRP for these devices from 2 kW over any bandwidth to 20 W/5 MHz and that Sirius XM had previously claimed that its receivers, which were designed prior to adoption of the 2010 WCS R&O, provide excellent adjacent band blocking performance. In addition, because of the likely sources of blockages?foliage, building walls, parked and moving vehicles, etc.?that will attenuate fixed WCS CPE devices' signals, if fixed WCS CPE were allowed to continue using up to 20 W/5 MHz peak EIRP without a specific per-megahertz PSD limit, the Commission determined that SDARS licensees are not likely to experience harmful interference from the operation of these devices. The Commission also affirmed that if WCS licensees were to aggregate spectrum for fixed WCS CPE, the power level in any 5-megahertz bandwidth would not be permitted to exceed 20 W.

9. The Commission further noted that the technologies that are being considered to provide WCS service?Long Term Evolution (LTE), Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access (WiMAX), and Wideband-Code Division Multiple Access (W-CDMA)?spread user devices' signals across the channel bandwidth and control the power of the RF subcarriers assigned to a particular device to prevent self-interference. Thus, even absent a specific PSD limit for fixed WCS CPE, the Commission determined that WCS licensees' efforts to prevent self-interference would effectively limit the PSD of fixed WCS CPE and further mitigate the potential for harmful interference to SDARS receivers. Finally, because wireless networks are typically initially designed for coverage and subsequently for capacity, the size of WCS cell sites is likely to decrease over time, which will decrease the maximum power transmitted by WCS CPE and ultimately lower these devices' resultant PSD. For these reasons, the Order on Reconsideration denied Sirius XM's request to impose a PSD limit of 4 W/MHz on fixed WCS CPE.

10. Bands of Operation. Sirius XM's petition regarding the establishment of guard bands for fixed WCS CPE in the 2.5-megahertz portions of WCS Blocks C and D nearest the SDARS band (i.e., 2317.5 MHz-2320 MHz and 2345-2347.5 MHz) asserted arguments that Sirius XM raised?and the Commission considered and rejected?in the 2010 WCS R&O. The Commission declined to revisit those contentions in the Order on Reconsideration. Sirius XM failed to present any new evidence that would compel the Commission to reconsider its previous findings. Moreover, it is ?settled Commission policy that petitions for reconsideration are not to be used for the mere re-argument of points previously advanced and rejected.? Thus, the Order on Reconsideration denied that portion of Sirius XM's petition.

11. Outdoor and Outdoor Antenna Use. In response to AT&T's and the WCS Coalition's petitions for reconsideration, the Commission decided in the Order on Reconsideration to remove the restrictions on low-power fixed WCS CPE operating with the stepped emission mask applicable to WCS mobile devices that prohibited such equipment from being used outdoors or with outdoor antennas. Consistent with the request in AT&T's and Sirius XM's June 15, 2012 compromise proposal, if low-power fixed WCS CPE operating with the OOBE limits applicable to WCS mobile devices is professionally installed in locations that are removed by 20 meters from roadways or in locations where it can be shown that the ground power level of ?44 dBm in WCS Blocks A and B or ?55 dBm in WCS Blocks C and D will not be exceeded at the nearest road location, then such equipment may be used outdoors and with outdoor antennas. The Commission also decided to remove the prohibitions on the use of low-power fixed WCS CPE outdoors and with outdoor antennas if the fixed WCS CPE complies with the more restrictive OOBE attenuation factors applicable to WCS base and fixed stations. The Commission determined that if used outdoors or with outdoor antennas, low-power fixed WCS CPE that is professionally installed or that meets the more restrictive OOBE attenuation factors applicable to WCS base and fixed stations will avert the discontinuance of existing WCS service, foster the provision of wireless broadband services, especially in unserved and underserved areas, and enhance user experience without causing harmful interference to SDARS receivers. It also determined that the signal attenuation due to the separation distances and outdoor blockages (i.e., building walls and other structures in urban settings; trees) that are likely to exist between low-power fixed WCS CPE transmitters and SDARS receivers and the requirement to use ATPC, would help limit the potential for harmful interference to SDARS receivers from low-power fixed WCS CPE being used outdoors or with outdoor antennas.

C. WCS Mobile and Portable Devices

12. Power Spectral Density Limit. In response to AT&T's and the WCS Coalition's petitions for reconsideration and consistent with the request in AT&T's and Sirius XM's June 15, 2012 compromise proposal, in the Order on Reconsideration, the Commission decided to eliminate the PSD limit for WCS mobile devices that operate with bandwidths greater than or equal to 5 megahertz in WCS Blocks A and B and use an appropriate uplink transmission technology (e.g., 3GPP LTE). In support of this decision, the Commission noted that in cellular systems, mobile device transmit (i.e., uplink) power control is a key radio resource management function for improving system capacity, coverage, and user quality (data rate or voice quality), lowering battery consumption, and controlling interference to adjacent cells of the same system, and per-megahertz PSD limits are not standardized for wideband wireless technologies such as W-CDMA, WiMAX, or LTE. Instead of controlling mobile devices' transmit power on a per-megahertz basis, LTE technology is designed to control mobile devices' transmit power by dynamically allocating spectrum resources, known as Physical Resource Blocks (PRBs), among mobile devices and setting the power levels of these PRBs on a frame-by-frame basis. Similarly, despite having different uplink physical layer and transmission schemes, WiMAX technology controls mobile devices' transmit power by uniformly distributing the uplink transmissions from a given mobile device across the operating channel bandwidth and controlling the power of the radio frequency (RF) subcarriers assigned to a particular device. In Wideband Code Division Multiple Access (W-CDMA), also known as Universal Mobile Telecommunication System (UMTS), networks, to balance the power received at the base station from all mobile devices to within a few decibels (dB) and optimize system performance, uplink power control information is transmitted from the base station in every time slot to control the power transmitted in each data channel frame assigned to a particular mobile device.

13. Therefore, in the same manner that uplink power control is used in LTE, WiMAX, and W-CDMA networks to optimize system performance, the Commission found that WCS licensees may use LTE, WiMAX, and W-CDMA technologies' uplink power control algorithms to effectively limit the PSD of WCS mobile devices to avoid self-interference, maximize the capacity and efficiency of the network, and mitigate the risk that these devices will cause harmful interference to SDARS receivers. Although the PSD of WCS mobile devices may occasionally exceed 50 mW/MHz, the Commission concluded that such instances would be rare and short lived. It also concluded that WCS licensees could control WCS mobile devices' transmitter power via power control, signal spreading, and/or other signal modulation techniques to prevent these devices from concentrating power greater than 50 mW/MHz in narrow segments of bandwidth that are near the SDARS band to avoid causing harmful interference to SDARS receivers.

14. For these reasons, the Order on Reconsideration eliminated the 50 mW/MHz PSD limit for WCS mobile devices that operate in the WCS A and B Blocks (2305-2315 MHz and 2350-2360 MHz) and employ single carrier frequency-division multiple access (SC FDMA) or similar technology. However, to address Sirius XM's concerns that WCS licensees' mobile devices could transmit more power than they could otherwise transmit in a 5-megahertz block by aggregating spectrum blocks and consistent with the WCS Coalition's assertion that a WiMAX or LTE mobile device's transmit power is uniformly distributed across the available channel bandwidth, the Order on Reconsideration clarified that WCS mobile devices are limited to a maximum EIRP of 250 mW for any bandwidth greater than or equal to 5 megahertz.

15. Out-of-Band Emissions Limits. Sirius XM's petition regarding the OOBE limits for WCS mobile devices in the 2320-2345 MHz SDARS band asserted numerous arguments that Sirius XM raised?and the Commission considered and rejected?in the 2010 WCS R&O. The Commission declined to revisit those contentions in the Order on Reconsideration. Sirius XM failed to present any new evidence that would compel the Commission to reconsider its previous findings. Moreover, it is ?settled Commission policy that petitions for reconsideration are not to be used for the mere re-argument of points previously advanced and rejected.? Thus, the Order on Reconsideration denied the portion of Sirius XM's petition to further restrict the OOBE limits for WCS mobile and portable devices in the 2320-2345 MHz band.

16. Bands of Operation. The Commission declined to remove the restriction that WCS mobile devices using FDD technology may not transmit in the upper WCS A and B Blocks and the 2.5-megahertz portion of the WCS D Block furthest removed from the SDARS band (2347.5-2360 MHz), as requested by AT&T. The Commission determined that restricting WCS FDD mobile devices from transmitting in the upper WCS blocks at 2347.5-2360 MHz band would provide added protection from harmful interference to adjacent-band AMT receivers that operate in the 2360-2395 MHz band. Therefore, the Order on Reconsideration denied the portion of AT&T's petition requesting that WCS mobile devices be allowed to operate in the upper WCS bands at 2347.5-2360 MHz.

17. However, although the Commission determined in the 2010 WCS R&O that the potential for harmful interference to SDARS receivers from mobile transmitters operating in the 2.5-megahertz portions of WCS Blocks C and D furthest removed from the SDARS band was negligible, in their June 15, 2012 joint agreement, AT&T and Sirius XM asserted that mobile operations in WCS Blocks C and D hold the most potential to cause harmful interference to satellite radio consumers. In their June 15, 2012 compromise proposal, AT&T and Sirius XM agreed that expanding the guard bands for WCS mobile and portable device transmissions to encompass all of WCS Blocks C and D would further reduce the risk that operation of WCS mobile transmitters in these bands could pose an unacceptable interference threat to SDARS reception. Thus, to further mitigate the potential for harmful interference to SDARS operations, the Commission decided to prohibit WCS mobile and portable transmitters from operating in all portions of WCS Blocks C and D. The Commission decided that this action would, in effect, provide a 5-megahertz transition band for SDARS receivers at each end of the SDARS band that would further decrease the potential for harmful interference to SDARS operations from WCS mobile devices operating in adjacent spectrum, while permitting the C and D Blocks spectrum to be used for WCS base stations or fixed services. Coupled with the relaxed PSD and duty cycle limits that the Commissions adopted in the Order on Reconsideration for WCS mobile devices, the Commission believed that this action would provide added interference protection to SDARS operations while advancing the Commission's goal of making mobile broadband services over the WCS spectrum widely available.

18. The Commission's adoption of this approach also furthered its resolution of the interference protection matters raised in Sirius XM's petition for reconsideration. The Commission first provided notice that it was considering the issue of interference management between the WCS and SDARS in the 2001 Public Notice in this proceeding, in which the Commission sought comment on requiring SDARS licensees to operate their repeaters in frequency bands at least 4 megahertz away from the edge of their licensed frequency bands, among other things. That issue remained in play with the timely filing of the Sirius XM Reconsideration Petition challenging the Commission's decision in the 2010 WCS R&O to adopt a different approach.

D. WCS Mobile, Portable, and Fixed CPE Duty Cycle Limits

19. To facilitate the deployment of broadband services in WCS spectrum, the Commission decided in the Order on Reconsideration to eliminate the duty cycle requirements for WCS mobile, portable, and fixed CPE employing FDD-based technology, consistent with AT&T's and Sirius XM's request in their June 15, 2012 compromise proposal. The Commission agreed with AT&T that the activity factor of a WCS mobile device is not a factor in determining potential interference to SDARS receivers that warrants a 25 percent duty cycle for WCS mobile and portable devices in WCS Blocks A and B, as the Commission determined in the 2010 WCS R&O. It also agreed with AT&T's and Sirius XM's assertions that adjacent-band WCS FDD operations will have minimal impact on the SDARS receivers' automatic gain control (AGC) circuitry because they involve no intermittent pulsing. However, based on Commission staff's analysis of the record and reinforced by the results of the testing in Ashburn, Virginia, the Commission decided to maintain the 38 percent duty cycle limit for WCS mobile devices using TDD-based technologies.

20. Regarding Sirius XM's argument that the 38 percent duty cycle limit for TDD-based devices established in 2010 WCS R&O was not supported by the record in this proceeding, the Commission noted that its decision to adopt a 38 percent duty cycle for TDD-based WCS user devices was a tradeoff based on its analysis of the record leading up to adoption of the 2010 WCS rules and the WCS/SDARS testing in Ashburn, Virginia. The Commission decided in 2010 to round up the permitted TDD duty cycle from the 35 percent used in the Ashburn, Virginia testing to 38 percent to allow for the majority of TDD profiles under an LTE or WiMAX technology selection, because the 35 percent duty cycle used during the testing only resulted in two isolated instances of negligible interference to SDARS receivers, not harmful interference that repeatedly interrupted the SDARS signal.

21. The Commission also declined to limit WCS mobile devices' transmissions to every other 5 millisecond (ms) frame as Sirius XM requested in its petition. As determined by the Commission's analyses and verified by the WCS/SDARS testing in Ashburn, Virginia, it found that the WCS mobile device's transmissions need not be limited to every other transmission frame to limit the potential for harmful interference to SDARS receivers, as requested by Sirius XM. However, to eliminate any uncertainty about how compliance with the duty cycle is measured, the Commission clarified its requirement that WCS subscriber devices' duty cycle be measured in a manner that is referenced directly to the frame duration for WCS technology being used. Specifically, industry standards for WiMAX and LTE technology specify frame lengths of 5 ms and 10 ms, respectively. Accordingly, for WCS networks using WiMAX technology, the duty cycle should be measured over a 5 ms frame; for WCS networks using LTE technology, the duty cycle should be measured over a 10 ms frame. For TDD technologies other than LTE and WiMAX, the duty cycle should be measured over a frame duration that is referenced directly to the technology being used.

E. WCS Out-of-Band Emissions Limit in the 2300-2305 MHz Amateur Radio Service Band

22. Regarding ARRL's petition requesting that the Commission require WCS licensees to be responsible for mitigating harmful interference to Amateur Radio Service operations in the 2300-2305 MHz band through operation of ? 2.102(f) of the Commission's rules and AT&T's and the WCS Coalition's opposition, as a general matter, the Commission noted that the technical and operating rules that its adopts for a particular service are designed to prevent harmful interference (i.e., interference which seriously degrades, obstructs, or repeatedly interrupts a radiocommunication service) to other services that operate in adjacent bands and to establish the RF environment for adjacent band services to coexist. In the case of the WCS, the Commission initially determined that an attenuation factor of 43 + 10 log (P) dB (i.e., a fixed limit of -43 dBW) below the transmitter output power P in Watts for WCS fixed and mobile devices' OOBE in the 2300-2305 MHz band would prevent interference to Amateur Radio Service operations in that band. The 2010 WCS R&O did not alter WCS fixed and mobile devices' OOBE limit of -43 dBW in the 2300-2305 MHz band and thus did not reduce or otherwise modify the interference protection that the Commission previously established for ARS operations in that band. For this reason, the Commission saw no reason to address the specific arguments that ARRL, AT&T, and the WCS Coalition made regarding the operation of ? 2.102(f) because the FCC's existing service and technical rules are already designed to account for WCS users operating adjacent to the ARS band. To the extent that ARRL was asking that the Commission revisit the attenuation factor originally established for the WCS and that was left unmodified in the 2010 WCS R&O, the Commission concluded that such a request for reconsideration was not timely filed and was not appropriate for reconsideration.

23. Clarification of Applicable Bands for Out-of-Band Emissions Limits. To eliminate any confusion in the Commission's rules about where the OOBE limits for WCS base and fixed stations, mobile devices, and fixed WCS CPE must be met, the Order on Reconsideration clarified the frequency bands in which the 43 + 10 log (P) dB and other OOBE attenuation factors below the transmitter power P are applicable. Specifically, WCS base and fixed stations and fixed WCS CPE transmitting with an average EIRP greater than 2 Watts must attenuate their OOBE below the transmitter power P, as measured over a 1 megahertz resolution bandwidth, by a factor of not less than 43 + 10 log (P) dB on all frequencies between 2305-2320 MHz and between 2345-2360 MHz that are outside the licensed band(s) of operation, not less than 75 + 10 log (P) dB in the 2320-2345 MHz band, not less than 43 + 10 log (P) dB in the 2300-2305 and 2360-2362.5 MHz bands, not less than 55 + 10 log (P) dB in the 2362.5-2365 MHz band, not less than 70 + 10 log (P) dB in the 2287.5-2300 MHz and 2365-2367.5 MHz bands, not less than 72 + 10 log (P) dB in the 2285-2287.5 and 2367.5-2370 MHz bands, and not less than 75 + 10 log (P) dB below 2285 MHz and above 2370 MHz.

24. WCS mobile and portable devices operating in the WCS A and B Blocks and fixed WCS CPE transmitting with an average EIRP of 2 Watts or less must attenuate their OOBE below the transmitter power P as measured over a 1 megahertz bandwidth, by a factor of not less than 43 + 10 log (P) dB on all frequencies between 2305-2320 MHz and between 2345-2360 MHz that are outside the licensed band(s) of operation, not less than 55 + 10 log (P) dB in the 2320-2324/2341-2345 MHz bands, not less than 61 + 10 log (P) dB in the 2324-2328/2337-2341 MHz bands, and not less than 67 + 10 log (P) dB in the 2328-2337 MHz band. In addition, WCS mobile and portable devices must attenuate their OOBE below the transmitter power P by a factor of not less than 43 + 10 log (P) dB in the 2300-2305 and 2360-2365 MHz bands, not less than 55 + 10 log (P) dB in the 2296-2300 MHz band, not less than 61 + 10 log (P) dB in the 2292-2296 MHz band, not less than 67 + 10 log (P) dB in the 2288-2292 MHz band, and not less than 70 + 10 log (P) dB below 2288 MHz and above 2365 MHz.

25. Measurement Procedures. The Order on Reconsideration clarified that measurements of the OOBE from WCS base, fixed, and fixed CPE stations and WCS mobile and portable devices made over a narrower resolution bandwidth than 1 megahertz (e.g., 1 percent of the emission bandwidth) must be integrated over the full measurement bandwidth of 1 megahertz to determine compliance with the relevant out-of-band emissions limits. Specifically, compliance with the part 27 WCS emissions limits rules is based on the use of measurement instrumentation employing a resolution bandwidth of 1 MHz or greater. However, in the 1 MHz bands immediately outside and adjacent to the channel blocks at 2305, 2310, 2315, 2320, 2345, 2350, 2355, and 2360 MHz, a resolution bandwidth of at least 1 percent of the emission bandwidth of the fundamental emission of the transmitter may be employed. A narrower resolution bandwidth is permitted in all cases to improve measurement accuracy provided the measured power is integrated over the full required measurement bandwidth (i.e., 1 MHz). The emission bandwidth is defined as the width of the signal between two points, one below the carrier center frequency and one above the carrier center frequency, outside of which all emissions are attenuated at least 26 dB below the transmitter power.

F. WCS Performance Requirements.

26. Extension of WCS Construction Deadlines. The Order on Reconsideration also lengthened by 6 months and restarted the WCS construction periods established in the 2010 WCS R&O to enable WCS licensees to respond to the rule revisions while ensuring significant deployment of facilities in the near term. For mobile and point-to-multipoint systems in WCS Blocks A and B, and point-to-multipoint systems in WCS Blocks C and D, a licensee must provide reliable signal coverage and offer service to at least 40 percent of the license area's population within 48 months, and 75 percent within 78 months. For fixed point-to-point services, except those deployed in the Gulf of Mexico license area, licensees must construct and operate 15 point-to-point links per million persons (one link per 67,000 persons) in a license area within 48 months, and 30 links (one link per 33,500 persons) within 78 months. In those license areas where licensees demonstrate that 25 percent of the license area's population for Blocks A, B, or D is within an AMT coordination zone, alternative requirements are applicable for mobile and point-to-multipoint services. Specifically, affected licensees must serve 25 (rather than 40) percent of the population within 48 months, and 50 (rather than 75) percent within 78 months. For point-to-point systems deployed on any spectrum block in the Gulf of Mexico license area, a licensee must construct and operate a minimum of 15 point-to-point links within 48 months, and a minimum of 15 point-to-point links within 78 months. The construction periods currently applicable to existing WCS licensees will run from the effective date of the rule revisions adopted in the Order on Reconsideration.

27. Coverage Requirements Instead of Substantial Service. The Commission's decision in the 2010 WCS R&O to migrate away from substantial service requirements was based upon a careful reading of the record, and a balanced consideration of the public interest. Therefore, the Commission disagreed with the Petitioners of the 2010 WCS R&O that these judgments were arbitrary and capricious. Accordingly, it declined, as it did in the 2010 WCS R&O after a careful assessment of that record, to apply substantial service performance requirements in the 2.3 GHz band for the C and D Blocks, or to reduce their quantitative benchmarks. In the 2010 WCS R&O, the Commission stated that its revised performance requirements would ?afford WCS licensees bright-line certainty,? and would ?facilitate Commission review of WCS performance showings.? Petitioners provided little to support their arguments that circumstances with respect to this spectrum are so difficult that the Commission must reinstate substantial service or otherwise reduce their construction obligations.

28. The Commission disagreed with petitioners that the more stringent technical rules for C and D Blocks relegates them to ?niche services? and it believed that relief that it provided in other areas will provide licensees with additional service options. It found that retaining quantitative benchmarks best supported its goals for this service; that is, that licensees will provide meaningful service in the near term and continue to use the spectrum throughout the course of their license periods. The Commission believed that, for the WCS, bright-line coverage requirements at specified thresholds serve to promote service throughout a licensed market, because they prevent licensees from ?cherry picking? areas for service rather than meeting the benchmarks specified in their license requirements.

29. The Commission noted that because of its action to prohibit mobile operations in WCS Blocks C and D, the respective requirements for the 40 and 75 percent population coverage benchmarks would only be applicable to point-to-multi-point systems. However, it maintained that quantitative benchmarks?rather than a return to substantial service?is still the appropriate standard for all operations in the C and D Blocks spectrum. Accordingly, the service requirement for the C and D Blocks shall be: 40 and 75 percent population coverage at the 48 and 78 month deadlines, respectively, for point-to-multipoint operations, with 15 point-to-point links per million persons in a license area within 48 months, and 30 point-to-point links per million persons in a license area within 78 months for point-to-point fixed operations.

30. Finally, the Commission noted that certain entities had sought guidance as to the specific performance requirements that would be applied to current or potential operations in the C and D Blocks that do not fall within the traditional mobile, point-to-multipoint, or point-to-point fixed models. For example, Gogo, Inc. sought clarification as to whether ground-to-air uplinks could be deployed in the C and D Blocks, and what coverage requirements would apply. The Commission noted that there are hybrid or non-traditional operations that do not fit precisely in one category; for example, there may be WCS point-to-multipoint systems that could be viewed as functionally consistent with a WCS point-to-point RF network, e.g., certain smart grid links to monitoring stations, maintenance instrumentation, automatic metering collection points, and video surveillance. However, given the wide range of deployments and applications possible, the Commission found that WCS licensees should seek guidance from the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau on a case-by-case basis in determining whether their service is permissible within the C and D Blocks, and which benchmarks apply.

31. Performance Penalties. The Commission finds basis in the record for reconsidering the rule that licenses will automatically terminate if a performance benchmark is not satisfied. The parties reiterated many of the same arguments that were raised throughout the proceeding, which the Commission previously considered and rejected. Despite the parties' arguments that applying the automatic termination policy is counter to prior Commission practice, the decision to terminate licenses if performance benchmarks are not met was consistent with the Commission's past practice in most geographically-licensed wireless services, including the 800 MHz Specialized Mobile Radio Service (800 MHz SMR), PCS, and Advanced Wireless Services (AWS), as well as in the 1997 WCS Report and Order. Further, although Petitioners continued to claim that an automatic termination rule deters investment and construction of networks, they provided no support that licensees have been denied financing or that deployment of broadband has been slowed due to this policy. The Commission remained unconvinced that automatic termination of a license for which the performance requirements are not met itself deters capital investment or otherwise hinders the development or deployment of service. On the contrary, several wireless services subject to this kind of performance penalty have thrived.

32. The Commission remains unpersuaded that it should revise its WCS rules to adopt a ?keep-what-you-use? policy because the Commission adopted the approach with respect to certain 700 MHz licenses. The Commission found that the considerations and goals with respect to WCS are so similar to the circumstances underlying the 700 MHz Service such that it was compelled to revise existing WCS requirements to mirror the 700 MHz performance penalties. While the 2010 WCS R&O did call attention to the difference between WCS and 700 MHz rules with respect to submarket performance requirements, the Commission noted that the submarket performance rule is only one distinction. Differences in the specific policy objectives behind the respective performance requirements and penalties also supported the application of a different performance penalty.

33. In adopting the ?keep-what-you-use? approach in the 700 MHz proceeding, the Commission sought to make available additional mechanisms to enable access to spectrum by new entrants after an initial licensee either fails or chooses not to provide service in a particular area by the applicable deadline. Alternatively, the focus of the performance requirements for the WCS adopted in the 2010 WCS R&O was to ensure the rapid and meaningful provision of service throughout an entire licensed market. Given the length of time that currently licensed spectrum has remained largely unused, the Commission purposefully imposed ambitious construction criteria, including the automatic termination performance penalty, to ensure that extensive service coverage occurs in the near term. The Commission found that this goal would not be better served by implementing a ?keep-what-you-use? performance penalty that may not facilitate service coverage in an area until after a current WCS licensee has returned unused spectrum to the Commission. In this context, the Commission concluded that the automatic termination approach would be more effective in accomplishing the Commission's objective of intensive, near term WCS construction.

34. Further, the Commission disagreed with the argument that the automatic termination approach is intrinsically tied to less strict performance benchmarks. The automatic termination approach has historically been applied to geographic market-based licenses generally. In adopting performance requirements for its various wireless services, the Commission has not as a practice linked substantial service and the use of the automatic termination penalty. To the contrary, the automatic termination approach has been used as a penalty for services that did not initially have a substantial service performance obligation.

35. Finally, the Commission rejected arguments that the automatic termination rule is unfair to licensees because, according to petitioners, the rule requires automatic termination of a license even where failure to meet a benchmark is due to circumstances out of the control of a licensee, or even, for example, if the licensee has covered 74 percent of the population at the final deadline. Petitioners argued that application of this policy would cut off service to customers and strand investment. However, ? 1.946(e)(1) of the Commission's rules provides that extensions may be granted where failure to comply with construction requirements is due to causes beyond the control of the licensee, and Commission staff has previously granted relief from the Commission's performance rules in cases where it was in the public interest to do so. For example, Commission staff has granted extensions where it found that a complete lack of available equipment for a service presented circumstances beyond the control of licensees, or where licensees were able to show a significant level of diligence and commitment to construction of facilities. As noted in the 2010 WCS R&O, the Commission stated that it would continue to consider and evaluate requests for extension or waiver and grant relief if circumstances warrant. The Commission emphasized, however, that any relief sought must be weighed against the public interest goals underlying our construction rules, which is to ensure the efficient use of spectrum and the expeditious provision of service to the public. As noted, in specifying performance rules for this service, the Commission purposefully imposed rigorous construction criteria and retained the automatic termination policy in order to ensure meaningful and rapid deployment of service in the WCS band. The Commission would grant extension or waiver relief only if it determines that such action is not contrary to the goals underlying the WCS performance requirements, and otherwise serves the public interest.

G. WCS Information Sharing Requirements

36. Notification Requirements. The Commission agreed that it is in the public interest to allow WCS licensees the flexibility to respond to market conditions by making minor modifications to their facilities as long as these modifications do not result in harmful interference to SDARS operations (i.e., muting). While the Commission believed that the 2 dB power flux density (PFD) increase notification trigger sought by the WCS Coalition may be problematic, it nonetheless found it appropriate to permit WCS licensees to optimize facilities and correct coverage gaps without advance notice in circumstances where such modifications are unlikely to cause harmful interference to SDARS receivers. Therefore, WCS licensees were allowed to modify their facilities, other than changes in location, without prior notice so long as the change does not increase the predicted PFD at ground level by more than 1 dB and notice of the modification is provided within 24 hours of deployment. The Commission saw no empirical evidence in the record that demonstrates that a 1 dB increase in PFD as a result of a WCS modification is likely to cause harmful interference to nearby SDARS receivers. Rather, it anticipated that in most cases there will be sufficient margin in the SDARS link budget such that harmful interference will be avoided.

37. Moreover, WCS licensees were not being exempted from their obligation to provide notice regarding modifications to their stations; WCS entities must notify SDARS licensees within 24 hours of these changes to allow for monitoring of the effects of the modifications. In addition, the notification exception for no more than a 1 dB increase in PFD can be distinguished from Sirius XM's prior proposal for imposition of system-wide PFD limits on WCS base station transmissions because it would only affect the trigger for notification of a modification to SDARS licensees, and is not an across the board criteria for limiting WCS base stations' ground-level power. If, after gaining experience with the 1 dB PFD increase exception to the notification procedures, there is harmful interference to SDARS receivers as a result of such modifications, the Commission would restore the formal notification procedure that requires 5-business days notice prior to modifying WCS facilities.

38. However, Sirius XM raised a valid argument that multiple modifications to WCS stations could result in a predicted aggregate PFD increase that may negatively affect SDARS receivers. To avoid such a result, although WCS licensees may make 24 hour post modification notifications as long as the predicted PFD increase at ground level is not greater than 1 dB, if an SDARS licensee demonstrates to the WCS licensee that the series of modifications using post-modification notification procedures may cause harmful interference to SDARS receivers, the WCS licensee must provide the SDARS licensee with a 5 day notice in advance of additional modifications to WCS base and fixed stations. However, the 1 dB limit will not apply where a coordination agreement between the parties specifies otherwise.

39. In addition, in light of the Commission's decision to adopt the maximum design ground power level targets along roadways of ?44 dBm for WCS Blocks A and B and ?55 dBm for WCS Blocks C and D, it also permitted after-the-fact notification where modifications to WCS base and fixed stations do not exceed these limits. However, it did not adopt Sirius XM's suggestion that, if it was unwilling to adopt WCS PFD limits, interference mitigation issues must be resolved through a separate coordination agreement between Sirius XM and the WCS licenses or through a clearinghouse acting on the licensees' behalf. Requiring such agreements or a clearinghouse would unnecessarily increase administrative burdens on all licensees.

40. Further, the Commission modified the rules to exclude WCS base and fixed stations operating under 2 W EIRP from the inventory and notification requirements and agreed with Sirius XM that, to the extent that the parties can mutually agree on alternative coordination and notification procedures, the rules should accommodate private agreements between WCS licensees and Sirius XM that implement such modified procedures. Although the Commission did not adopt a list of modifications unlikely to cause interference where ?after-the-fact-notification? would apply as suggested by Sirius XM, it recognized that it would be beneficial for WCS licensees and Sirius XM to reach agreement on procedures that would streamline the notification process.

41. Lastly, the Commission clarified that the inventory and SDARS licensee notification requirements in ? 27.72 apply to both WCS base and fixed stations (except fixed WCS CPE). Sirius XM is correct that the Commission has during this proceeding used the terms ?WCS base station? and ?WCS station? interchangeably in the context of information sharing requirements. It is discernible from a review of the 2001 Public Notice and 2007 Notice in this proceeding that the Commission's use of ?base station? also encompassed fixed stations. Moreover, the 2010 WCS R&O' s use of language directing WCS licensees to provide information to SDARS licensees regarding their ?deployed infrastructure? also demonstrated that the information sharing obligations are not limited only to base stations used in a mobile system. Accordingly, it revised ? 27.72 to make clear that WCS licensees must share fixed and base station information with SDARS licensees. However, it clarified that fixed WCS CPE (i.e., fixed equipment operated by a WCS subscriber) is not subject to this requirement. Further, to the extent that WCS licensees have not yet provided notice for existing fixed stations to SDARS licensees, WCS licensees must do so no later than 30 days after the effective date of this Order.

42. Duty to Cooperate and Coordination. Upon review, the Commission found no basis to revise its requirements regarding WCS licensees' duty to cooperate. First, it declined to adopt the proposals submitted by Sirius XM as they were considered when they were initially proposed in this proceeding and explicitly rejected by the Commission in the 2010 WCS R&O. The Commission found that no further evidence had been introduced into the record to cause us to reconsider this decision. Specifically, it rejected as unnecessary the proposals that WCS licensees provide a schedule of when network facilities will be transmitting, or make pre-sale devices available to Sirius XM for inspection. Although it expected the parties to cooperate and take good faith measures to prevent harmful interference, it decided it must balance the need for an exchange of useful information against requiring the disclosure of market sensitive information that is not reasonably necessary to prevent harmful interference, such as licensees' proprietary equipment information and business or operating plans.

43. For these reasons, the Commission also declined to require WCS licensees to enter into a coordination agreement with Sirius XM with provisions similar to the June 15, 2012 AT&T/Sirius XM agreement. It emphasized, however, that cooperation between WCS and SDARS licensees is critical to the successful coexistence between WCS and SDARS systems, and encouraged WCS licensees to develop and enter into separate coordination agreements with SDARS licensees for interference mitigation. The Commission therefore revised ? 27.72 to incorporate the AT&T/Sirius XM proposed language encouraging the adoption of coordination agreements by WCS and SDARS. To the extent any provision of a coordination agreement between parties to mutually resolve harmful interference conflicts with other information sharing requirements adopted in this proceeding, the parties are obligated to follow the procedures established under the agreement.

44. The Commission also did not require that a clearinghouse or single point of contact be created to provide information from WCS licensees to Sirius XM. It agreed with the WCS Coalition that interference issues are best handled directly by the entities operating the networks and that an obligatory intermediary will add an unnecessary step into the process. Similarly, the Commission concluded that de facto spectrum transfer lessees already assume the notification and interference obligations pursuant to our secondary markets rules and policies. However, if the number of WCS providers increases dramatically, the Commission may reevaluate whether the burden to SDARS of coordinating with multiple providers offsets the inefficiency of introducing a third party into the process.

45. Although the Commission did not mandate how information should be exchanged between WCS and SDARS licensees, it expected that licensees would coordinate to ensure the seamless and successful exchange of information. WCS and SDARS licensees are able to enter into agreements, as discussed above, regarding the logistics of information exchanges, and the Commission encouraged parties to implement measures to streamline the process to the extent possible.

H. Aeronautical Mobile Telemetry and Deep Space Network Coordination

46. Upon further review, the Commission found it necessary to reconsider and clarify the role of ITU-R M.1459 in the coordination of WCS and AMT facilities to promote and bring certainty to the coordination process. It required WCS and AMT entities, using accepted engineering practices, to apply ITU-R M.1459, as adapted to local conditions and operating characteristics of both WCS and AMT systems, in coordinating their stations, and thus modified rule ? 27.73(a) accordingly.

47. Recommendation ITU-R M.1459 sets forth the recommended framework for co-channel sharing between AMT and mobile satellite services operations, but is not specific to WCS terrestrial operations. Although the 2010 WCS R&O did not specifically require that the parties use the interference protection mechanism set forth in the Recommendation in coordinating AMT and WCS facilities, ? 27.73(a) provides that coordination within 45 km or line of sight of an AMT facility is necessary to protect AMT receivers ?consistent with Recommendation ITU-R M.1459.?

48. In referencing the Rec

Source: https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2013/02/11/2013-02907/operation-of-wireless-communications-services-in-the-23-ghz-band-establishment-of-rules-and-policies

Where To Vote james harden breeders cup Mitch Lucker Red Cross CMA Awards 2012 election day