[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 3 (Monday, January 6, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 588-601]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-28974]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 1, 2, 27 and 90

[PS Docket Nos. 12-94, 06-229, WT Docket No. 06-150; FCC 13-137]


Consolidated Service Rules for the 758-769 and 788-799 MHz Bands

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Communications Commission (Commission) adopts a 
Second Report and Order that establishes consolidated service rules for 
the 758-769 and 788-799 MHz bands, the 700 MHz spectrum licensed to the 
First Responder Network Authority (FirstNet) for purposes of 
establishing a nationwide public safety broadband network. The Second 
Report and Order also lifts the suspension on the certification of 
equipment for operation in this band and directs the Office of 
Engineering and Technology to commence such certification, consistent 
with the service rules adopted therein.

DATES: Effective January 6, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erika Olsen, Senior Legal Counsel, 
Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, (202) 418-2868 or 
erika.olsen@fcc.gov; Brian Hurley, Attorney Advisor, Public Safety and 
Homeland Security Bureau, (202) 418-2220 or brian.hurley@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Second 
Report and Order, FCC 13-137; PS Docket Nos. 12-94, 06-229, WT Docket 
No. 06-150; adopted and released October 28, 2013. The full text of 
this document is available for public inspection during regular 
business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Room CY-A257, 445 12th 
Street SW., Washington, DC 20554, or online at http://www.fcc.gov/document/700-mhz-public-safety-broadband-service-rules-report-and-order. This document will also be available via ECFS at http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/. Documents will be available electronically in 
ASCII, Microsoft Word, and/or Adobe Acrobat. The complete text may be 
purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, 445 12th Street SW., 
Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554. Alternative formats are available 
for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, 
audio format), by sending an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or calling the 
Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 
(voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY).

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This document contains no new or modified information collection 
requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), 
Public Law 104-13.

I. Introduction

    1. In the Second Report and Order (Second R&O) we adopt 
consolidated rules, primarily technical service rules, for the 758-769/
788-799 MHz band, which is licensed to the First Responder Network 
Authority (FirstNet) on a nationwide basis. We also direct the Office 
of Engineering and Technology (OET) to accept and process applications 
for equipment certification in this band consistent with the newly 
consolidated rules. Our adoption of the Second R&O will further 
``facilitate the transition'' of spectrum to FirstNet to enable its 
deployment of a nationwide public safety broadband network as 
prescribed by statute. We also focus on these technical matters in 
order to expedite the availability of equipment for use in this band, 
which will fulfill ``the imminent need'' FirstNet cites ``for 
authorized equipment to meet the needs of jurisdictions that may deploy 
early'' in its licensed spectrum.
    2. The rules we adopt today will provide a necessary foundation for 
FirstNet's operations and expedite the availability of equipment for 
use in this band. As noted below, in light of the urgent need to resume 
our process for certifying equipment for use in promoting more 
effective public safety operations in this band, and because that 
process cannot be resumed in the absence of governing technical service 
rules, we find good cause to make the Second R&O effective immediately 
upon publication in the Federal Register.

II. Background

    3. The Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, 
enacted February 22, 2012, provides for the deployment of a nationwide 
public safety broadband network in the 700 MHz band. The Act 
established FirstNet as an independent authority within the National 
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), and required 
the Commission to grant a license to FirstNet for the use of both the 
existing public safety broadband spectrum (763-768/793-798 MHz) and the 
spectrally adjacent D Block (758-763/788-793 MHz), a commercial 
spectrum block that the statute required the Commission to reallocate 
for public safety use. The Act charges FirstNet with the responsibility 
for establishing and overseeing ``a nationwide, interoperable public 
safety broadband network'' operated in this spectrum by taking ``all 
actions necessary to ensure the building, deployment, and operation of 
the . . . network, in consultation with Federal, State, tribal, and 
local

[[Page 589]]

public safety entities, the Director of NIST, the Commission, and the 
public safety advisory committee [that section 6205 of the Act requires 
FirstNet to establish].'' Among its more specific duties, FirstNet is 
responsible for issuing Requests for Proposals (RFPs) and entering into 
contracts for the construction, operation and management of the network 
on a nationwide basis, using funds allocated for these purposes under 
the Act.
    4. The Act also established within the Commission a Technical 
Advisory Board for First Responder Interoperability (Interoperability 
Board) charged with the development of recommended minimum technical 
requirements to ensure nationwide interoperability for the public 
safety broadband network based on ``commercial standards for Long Term 
Evolution (LTE) service.'' On May 22, 2012, the Interoperability Board 
submitted its recommendations to the Commission, and on June 21, 2012, 
the Commission approved the transmittal of these recommendations to 
FirstNet. The Act requires FirstNet to incorporate the recommendations 
into its RFPs ``without materially changing'' them.
    5. On September 7, 2012, the Public Safety and Homeland Security 
Bureau adopted, on delegated authority, a Report and Order implementing 
the clear statutory directive requiring the Commission to reallocate 
the D Block for ``public safety services.'' The Bureau also deleted a 
number of Commission rules that were plainly inconsistent with this 
revised allocation, including the rules establishing, providing license 
authority with respect to, and governing operations under the ``Public 
Safety Broadband License'' that had previously been established for the 
existing public safety broadband spectrum. On November 15, 2012, the 
Bureau granted FirstNet the license prescribed by statute, under call 
sign WQQE234.
    6. The Commission released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) 
on March 8, 2013, seeking comment on additional measures to implement 
its statutory responsibilities regarding deployment of the public 
safety broadband network. The NPRM sought comment on the adoption of 
consolidated technical service rules for the network; on the exercise 
of the Commission's statutory responsibilities as they relate to 
oversight of FirstNet's operations; and on transition matters for the 
various classes of incumbent operations in the spectrum licensed to 
FirstNet. The Commission also sought comment on the scope of its 
authority as it relates to these proposals, particularly in light of 
the statutory delegation to FirstNet of the responsibility to develop 
``the technical and operational requirements of the network.''
    7. FirstNet filed comments on the NPRM on August 2, 2013, after the 
comment cycle had completed. While not addressing for the most part the 
substantive rules at issue, FirstNet urged the Commission to ``act 
quickly to amend its technical service rules to enable FirstNet to 
expedite the deployment of [its network].'' FirstNet also expressed 
support for ``swift Commission action to begin accepting and processing 
equipment authorizations'' in its licensed spectrum, particularly in 
light of imminent public safety network deployments planned therein. On 
August 28, the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau published a 
notice in the Federal Register providing an additional seven days for 
public comment on FirstNet's filing, 78 FR 53124, Aug. 28, 2013. The 
few comments received in response were supportive of these views.

III. Second Report and Order

    8. In the Second R&O, we adopt consolidated technical service rules 
to facilitate FirstNet's efforts in deploying a nationwide public 
safety broadband network in the 700 MHz band. The adoption of these 
rules will also enable the Commission to certify for operation in the 
spectrum licensed to FirstNet. This will expedite the availability of 
equipment for operation in this band, which FirstNet and numerous other 
commenters identify as an urgent priority given the near-term 
deployments planned in this spectrum.
    9. In the NPRM we sought comment, including specific data and 
information, on the costs and benefits of each proposal set forth and 
of any potential alternatives to such proposals. The few commenters 
that addressed the potential costs associated with consolidating 
technical service rules under part 90 anticipate that such costs will 
be minimal. Such comments are unsurprising, given that the rules 
proposed for consolidation are already codified in Commission rules and 
largely track the service rules that apply to commercial LTE services 
in neighboring bands. Accordingly, we proceed with the consolidation of 
technical rules based on the record before us.

A. Consolidating the Rules That Govern the Nationwide Public Safety 
Broadband Network

    10. In the NPRM, the Commission observed that ``rules governing 700 
MHz commercial wireless spectrum, including the D Block, are codified 
primarily in part 27 (``Miscellaneous Wireless Communications 
Services''), while rules governing the existing public safety broadband 
spectrum generally fall under part 90.'' The Commission proposed, as a 
general matter, to modify its rules so as to merge the requirements 
governing both band segments into a unified set of part 90 rules. 
FirstNet and many other commenters expressed support for this general 
approach, and none opposed it. Accordingly, in the Second R&O we adopt 
a unified set of part 90 rules to govern FirstNet's licensed spectrum.
1. A Foundation of Technical Service Rules for the Network
    11. We first consider the Commission's proposed modifications to 
the part 27 technical service rules governing the D Block and parallel 
part 90 rules governing the public safety broadband spectrum (763-768/
793-798 MHz). The Commission proposed such modifications to unify under 
a common set of rules a number of technical requirements, many of them 
substantively similar or identical to one another, that govern the two 
respective segments of FirstNet's licensed spectrum. The Commission 
also sought comment on the merits of these technical requirements as 
applied to the combined spectrum allocation licensed to FirstNet. In 
this section, we consider each requirement in turn.
a. Power Limits
    12. Power Limits. In the NPRM, the Commission proposed to modify 
Sec.  90.542(a) of its rules to bring the D Block frequencies within 
its purview and to delete as redundant the parallel provisions of Sec.  
27.50(b). The Commission also sought comment on whether the power 
limits established in Sec.  90.542(a) remain appropriate for the 
combined public safety broadband allocation, and on the relative costs 
and benefits of any proposed alternatives. In addition, the Commission 
sought comment on whether the operational parameters of Long Term 
Evolution (LTE) technology call for the placement of more restrictive 
limits on the power output of portable (i.e., hand-held) devices 
operated in the public safety broadband allocation.
    13. Comments. Most commenters that addressed the issue support 
maintaining the power and antenna height limits set forth in Sec.  
90.542(a) and extending the reach of this provision to the D Block. 
Harris supports this general approach, but argues that the rule's 
reduced base station power limits for antennas above

[[Page 590]]

305 meters in height above average terrain (HAAT) ``may not reflect the 
economic realities of building out [the network] in rural areas'' and 
that ``[f]lexibility should be allowed for implementation of a cost 
effective network . . . but free of rules that may force higher site 
densities based on regulation rather than need.'' To that end, Harris 
contends that ``a single set of maximum power limits should be 
established and the licensee should be offered flexibility to determine 
specific operating parameters for each RF site'' within these limits. 
Verizon opposes Harris's proposal, observing that the rule ``already 
allow[s] operations in rural areas at power levels that are twice that 
of higher density areas.'' Verizon further argues that more restrictive 
power limits on transmissions from antennas above 305 meters HAAT 
should remain in place ``to protect not only nearby commercial 700 MHz 
operations, but other FirstNet and narrowband public safety operations 
as well.''
    14. A number of commenters also argue that the power limits 
currently in place for portable devices are consistent with the 
operational parameters of LTE and should not be restricted further. 
Motorola Solutions explains that the power limits established under 
Sec.  90.542, unlike those specified by LTE standards, are expressed in 
terms of ``effective radiated power'' (ERP) and thus account for 
antenna gains and losses. Motorola Solutions further argues that the 
Commission should continue to permit ``high gain/high powered 
operations'' in this band, because ``higher power LTE devices improve 
spectral efficiency and coverage range, especially in rural areas with 
large inter-site distances and low user density.'' Meanwhile, General 
Dynamics contends that further restricting the permissible power output 
of hand-held devices operated in the public safety broadband allocation 
``would negate some manufacturers' research and development investment-
to-date'' in higher-power LTE devices and ``could greatly impact 
ongoing system-level engineering trades for the emerging [network] 
being designed by the FirstNet.''
    15. Discussion. As the Commission observed in the NPRM, power 
limits play an important role in minimizing the potential for 
radiofrequency (RF) transmissions to create harmful interference for 
operations in co-channel and adjacent spectrum bands. Identical power 
limits are already in place for the public safety broadband spectrum 
and D Block, and the majority of commenters support the consolidation 
of these existing requirements under Sec.  90.542. Moreover, as AT&T 
observes, the proposed consolidated limits are those that already 
``apply to 700 MHz commercial wireless services,'' which include LTE 
services. We thus find that the proposed limits are reasonable for 
FirstNet's licensed spectrum, which will be used to deploy a nationwide 
LTE broadband network for first responders. Also, while recognizing the 
need to afford FirstNet flexibility to implement its network in a cost-
effective manner, we decline to reformulate the rule as Harris proposes 
to sever the relationship between base station power limit and antenna 
height above average terrain. We first observe that FirstNet has not 
sought any modification of the restrictions currently in place, which 
are already calibrated to provide maximum flexibility to operators 
consistent with protecting both adjacent and co-channel operations from 
interference. We also note Verizon's observation that the rules in 
place already provide for higher-power transmissions in rural areas, 
which should enable sites to be deployed less densely in areas where it 
may be particularly costly to build out the network. Accordingly, we 
consolidate the power limits for FirstNet's licensed spectrum under 
Sec.  90.542(a) as proposed. Moreover, as we find no support in the 
record for further restricting the permissible power output of hand-
held devices operated in this spectrum to reflect the operational 
parameters of LTE technology, we will retain the 3 watt ERP limit the 
rule currently prescribes for hand-held (i.e., portable) devices.
    16. Power Strength Limits (Power Flux Density). In the NPRM, the 
Commission proposed consolidating under Sec.  90.542(b) of its rules 
the power flux density limits that govern the respective segments of 
FirstNet's licensed spectrum. The Commission then sought comment on 
whether the limit set forth, namely 3000 microwatts per square meter 
([mu]w/m\2\) on the ground within 1000 meters of the base of an antenna 
for any signal transmitted in excess of 1000 watts ERP, remains 
appropriate. Finally, it sought comment on the costs and benefits of 
the proposed rule consolidation and of any possible alternatives.
    17. Comments. Several commenters support the proposed consolidation 
of existing power flux density limits under Sec.  90.542(b). One such 
commenter, Motorola Solutions, explains that ``[i]n the 800 MHz band, 
the 3000 [mu]w/m\2\ limit has proven to be an effective compromise 
between service and interference prevention,'' one that ``does not 
prevent interference in all cases [but] is an effective standard to 
trigger the initiation of mitigation work.'' Harris, on the other hand, 
argues that limiting the power flux density only of signals transmitted 
in excess of 1000 watts ERP ``is counterproductive to minimizing 
harmful interference.'' Harris explains that even lower ERP 
transmissions from a FirstNet base station could, ``by a combined 
effect of the site antenna directivity and ERP,'' produce a power flux 
density that is sufficient to create a serious potential for 
interference with public safety narrowband operations in the 
surrounding area. Harris explains that co-location of broadband and 
narrowband sites can mitigate this problem but that ``site densities 
for LTE are expected to be higher necessitating the need for broadband-
only sites.'' Accordingly, Harris recommends extending rule to cover 
base station transmissions at any level of ERP.
    18. Discussion. Power flux density limits help mitigate the 
potential for a base station's transmissions to create interference for 
adjacent-band users in the immediate area. We agree with Motorola 
Solutions that the limits currently in place provide for interference 
mitigation without unduly constraining service. We further observe that 
no public safety narrowband licensee or other public safety commenter 
argued that the proposed PFD limits are insufficiently restrictive to 
protect narrowband or other operations from interference. We will 
therefore consolidate the existing PFD limits as proposed. In doing so, 
we acknowledge Harris's argument that FirstNet's placement and 
configuration of sites within its network may affect the probability 
that adjacent narrowband users may encounter harmful interference from 
its base station transmissions. We would expect that FirstNet will 
carefully coordinate its site deployments with adjacent narrowband 
licensees and adjust its operations as appropriate to mitigate any 
problems that may arise. The Commission may also consider adoption of a 
more restrictive PFD limit for this spectrum in the future should 
circumstances warrant.
b. Emission Limits
    19. In the NPRM the Commission sought comment on proposals to unify 
under Sec.  90.543 of our rules the out-of-band emission (OOBE) limits 
that govern the public safety broadband spectrum allocation, as 
expanded to include the D Block. First, the Commission proposed 
consolidating into Sec.  90.543(e) the provisions restricting emissions 
from the public

[[Page 591]]

safety broadband allocation into the adjacent 700 MHz public safety 
narrowband segment (769-775/799-805 MHz). It then proposed 
consolidating into Sec.  90.543(f) the limits on emissions from the 
public safety broadband allocation into the 1559-1610 MHz band, which 
supports the operation of Global Positioning System (GPS) L1 receivers, 
and to retain the explicit language in Sec.  90.543(f) that the rule 
applies to emissions ``including harmonics.'' Finally, it sought 
comment on whether limits codified in Sec.  27.53(d)(3) on emissions 
from the D Block into frequencies below 758 MHz, between 775 and 788 
MHz, and above 806 MHz should be extended to apply to the public safety 
broadband spectrum. For each of these proposals, the Commission also 
sought comment on any possible alternatives and on the respective costs 
and benefits of each.
    20. Comments. All commenters that addressed this issue support 
retaining appropriate limits on emissions from the public safety 
broadband allocation into adjacent spectrum bands, and the majority of 
these commenters endorse the specific proposals issued in the NPRM.
    21. A number of commenters emphasize the need for appropriate rules 
limiting emissions from the public safety broadband allocation into the 
adjacent narrowband spectrum. Motorola Solutions supports the proposed 
consolidation of the existing limits on such emissions, noting that it 
``strongly opposes any reduction in the protection afforded to public 
safety narrowband systems.'' AT&T supports the proposed rule 
consolidation as one that would ``apply to the national public safety 
broadband spectrum the same requirements applicable to commercial 
wireless service.'' Harris argues that the protection of adjacent 
narrowband systems ``require[s] special attention by the [C]ommission'' 
given the incompatibility of broadband technologies with these systems, 
which are ``used for existing critical communications.'' Harris 
believes that the proposed limit on emissions into the narrowband 
spectrum would not adequately protect these existing systems from 
interference from LTE operations. Accordingly, it proposes a more 
robust set of protections under which limits on emissions into the 
narrowband spectrum would vary based on the nature (e.g., base vs. 
mobile) of both the transmitter and the receiver of the out-of-band 
signal.
    22. With respect to the 1559-1610 MHz band, commenters acknowledge 
the importance of protecting GPS L1 receivers operated there from 
interference. General Dynamics states that the protection of GPS 
operations ``is viewed with great importance,'' while Motorola 
Solutions observes that ``GPS is a critically important service to 
public safety as well as a wide range of consumer, enterprise and 
government applications.'' While commenters generally support the 
proposed consolidation under Sec.  90.543(f) of the existing rules 
limiting emissions from the public safety broadband allocation into the 
1559-1610 MHz band, parties disagree on whether that provision should 
retain the phrase ``including harmonics.'' General Dynamics contends 
that this phrase ``is necessary to ensure that the rules are 
unambiguous about restrictions that are placed on harmonics of intended 
transmissions'' and that the cost impact of its inclusion would be 
``minimal.'' Ericsson, on the other hand, contends that the provision 
in question would apply to harmonics emissions even in the absence of 
explicit wording to that effect, making such wording ``not necessary.''
    23. Finally, a number of commenters support the proposed extension 
to the public safety broadband spectrum of existing limits imposed on 
emissions from the D Block into neighboring commercial spectrum bands. 
General Dynamics observes that ``public safety systems based on LTE 
technology will have to co-exist with commercial services operating in 
adjacent spectrum'' and that adopting the proposed rule would merely 
``ensure consistency'' with emission limitations already imposed on 700 
MHz public safety narrowband operations. General Dynamics further 
contends that the proposed limits ``are relatively straightforward to 
achieve by fixed, mobile and portable stations'' and that adoption of 
the proposal thus ``will not impose any additional cost on public 
safety station equipment.'' AT&T also supports the proposal, observing 
that its adoption would harmonize the requirements applicable to this 
band with those that apply to 700 MHz commercial wireless services.
    24. Discussion. Out-of-band emissions limits play a critical role 
in minimizing inter-band interference. As several commenters recognize, 
the limits established under Sec.  90.543(e) have been calibrated to 
prevent public safety broadband operations from interfering with 
operations in the adjacent public safety narrowband spectrum. Moreover, 
while Harris explains that its alternative proposal ``is based on 3GPP 
standard practice for evaluating co-location and co-existence of 
commercial deployments,'' the rule as written is aligned with the rules 
applicable to 700 MHz commercial bands. We accordingly modify Sec.  
90.543(e) to include within its purview the D Block portion of 
FirstNet's spectrum. In doing so, we emphasize that this provision 
merely establishes a baseline of protection, one which FirstNet may opt 
to strengthen as it moves forward with its deployment and engages in 
its required consultations with State and local governments. 
Accordingly, while we decline to adopt more stringent out-of-band 
emissions limits of the sort Harris proposes, we encourage FirstNet to 
work cooperatively with adjacent-channel narrowband licensees to ensure 
that their respective operations are adequately protected.
    25. Section 90.543(f), which limits emissions from the public 
safety broadband spectrum into the 1559-1610 MHz band, protects 
critical GPS operations from interference. Accordingly, with the 
support of many commenters, we incorporate the D Block into this 
provision. We further observe that no commenters provided a compelling 
reason to delete the phrase ``including harmonics'' from this 
provision, while one argues that such deletion could create unnecessary 
ambiguity. We therefore retain the original wording of the part 90 
provision.
    26. Finally, we observe that many commenters support the 
Commission's proposed adoption of a part 90 provision limiting 
emissions from the public safety broadband allocation into neighboring 
commercial spectrum bands, and none oppose the proposal. The adoption 
of this proposal would further align the technical service rules for 
this band with those established for commercial 700 MHz LTE operations. 
Moreover, the one commenter to address the cost implications of the 
proposal argues that it would create no cost burden. We accordingly 
adopt the proposal.
c. Field Strength Limits
    27. In the NPRM, the Commission sought comment on whether a field 
strength limit should be established for the expanded public safety 
broadband allocation to limit interference between the FirstNet radio 
access network (RAN) and any State Networks deployed in the same band. 
The Commission then sought comment more specifically on whether to 
adopt for this band the field strength limit of 40 dBuV/M specified in 
Sec.  27.55(a)(2) for 700 MHz commercial wireless spectrum, or whether 
an alternative limit would be more appropriate. The Commission also

[[Page 592]]

sought comment on the costs and benefits of the various options.
    28. Comments. Commenters were divided on whether the Commission 
should adopt a field strength limit for FirstNet's licensed spectrum. 
Motorola Solutions supports the adoption of the proposed 40 dBuV/M 
limit ``[g]iven the likelihood that there will be more than one network 
operating in [this spectrum.]'' However, it also notes that 40 dBuV/M 
represents a ``relatively high'' field strength limit that is 
``sufficient to cause interference,'' so ``deployments near service 
area boundaries [will] require licensee coordination.'' AT&T contends 
that a field strength limit should be adopted ``to mitigate the 
potential for harmful interference between the nationwide network and 
any State networks,'' and it proposes adoption of the 40 dBuV/M limit 
already specified ``for 700 MHz commercial wireless services'' in Sec.  
27.55(a)(2). General Dynamics and TIA also support using the 40 dBuV/M 
limit set forth in Sec.  27.55(a)(2).
    29. Some commenters, however, oppose the Commission's adoption of a 
field strength limit for FirstNet's licensed spectrum. Harris contends 
that any State Networks deployed in this spectrum must ``function 
logically [with FirstNet's network] as a single RAN,'' making field 
strength limits ``not necessary for this spectrum.'' Ericsson similarly 
argues that such limits are unnecessary given the expectation that 
FirstNet ``will work in a cooperative way to ensure that harmful 
interference is not an issue through coordination and site 
engineering.'' Alcatel-Lucent also opposes adoption of such a limit 
``at this time.''
    30. Discussion. Although FirstNet is licensed on a nationwide 
basis, we acknowledge the importance of minimizing interference between 
the FirstNet network and any ``State Network'' deployed in the same 
spectrum. The statutory scheme under which State Networks may be 
deployed, however, includes several provisions that serve to promote 
the operational integration of such networks with FirstNet's nationwide 
deployment. A State electing to deploy its own network must submit an 
interoperability plan for the Commission's approval; apply to NTIA to 
lease spectrum capacity from FirstNet upon demonstrating that will have 
the technical capabilities to operate its network, have the ability to 
maintain ongoing interoperability with FirstNet, and provide a 
comparable quality of service; and pay any user fees associated with 
its use of FirstNet's core network. These provisions, among others, 
already contemplate a significant amount of advance coordination of 
State Network operations with those of FirstNet. We therefore do not 
find it necessary at this time to adopt a field strength limit for RANs 
operated in FirstNet's licensed spectrum.
d. Interference Coordination
    31. The Commission sought comment in the NPRM on whether FirstNet 
or other broadband operators in its licensed spectrum should be 
required to engage in interference coordination of some kind, either 
with 700 MHz commercial licensees or with incumbent public safety 
narrowband licensees.
    32. Comments. While several commenters acknowledge the importance 
of protecting co-channel and spectrally adjacent operations from mutual 
interference, many oppose the adoption of formal requirements for 
FirstNet or other public safety broadband operators to coordinate with 
either 700 MHz commercial or incumbent public safety narrowband 
licensees. APCO ``cautions the Commission to refrain from adopting any 
unnecessary procedures or requirements that would have the effect of 
introducing additional complexity on network planning with little or no 
corresponding benefit.'' Motorola Solutions raises similar concerns and 
suggests that interference coordination procedures be ``implemented as 
a design guideline'' rather than a binding rule. Ericsson meanwhile 
suggests that, while the Commission ``is wise to consider coordinating 
interference issues'' between incumbent narrowband operators and 
FirstNet, these two constituencies are ``highly motivated'' to 
coordinate with one another even in the absence of any formal 
requirements. AT&T also opposes the adoption of formal coordination 
requirements but recommends that the Commission adopt for the public 
safety broadband allocation the informal coordination procedures 
codified for commercial operations under Sec.  27.64.
    33. Alone among commenters, the Commonwealth of Virginia (Virginia) 
argues ``that co-ordination requirements must be put in place to 
protect incumbent narrowband operations'' such as its own. In support 
of its position, Virginia explains that its network ``has already 
experienced harmful interference from the testing of a 700 MHz LTE 
system in Virginia by a manufacturer,'' an outcome it deems 
``unacceptable for public safety communications.''
    34. Discussion. We agree with commenters that assert the importance 
of coordination among spectrally and geographically adjacent network 
operators to protect against mutual interference. At the same time, we 
observe once again that the statute creating FirstNet imposes on it a 
number of consultative obligations, including obligations to consult 
with state and local governments as it designs and implements its 
network. In addition, FirstNet's desire to attract public safety 
customers and potential commercial partners is likely to create 
incentives for additional coordination beyond what is statutorily 
required, which are different in kind and degree from those of a 
manufacturer conducting tests. Accordingly, we do not find it necessary 
at this time to adopt any formal requirements that FirstNet coordinate 
its operations with either incumbent narrowband or 700 MHz commercial 
operators. We will continue, however, to exercise our spectrum 
management and licensing responsibilities as necessary to ensure that 
properly authorized radio communications are protected from harmful 
interference, and we encourage all parties to work together to minimize 
the potential for interference.
e. International Considerations
    35. In the NPRM, the Commission proposed to remove the D Block from 
the reach of Sec.  27.57(b) and place it within the purview of Sec.  
90.533, which sets forth substantively identical requirements 
concerning international coordination. Ericsson and General Dynamics, 
the only parties to address the issue, support this proposed rule 
consolidation. Accordingly, we adopt the proposal.
f. 700 MHz Public Safety Guard Band
    36. In the NPRM, the Commission observed that FirstNet's license 
includes the 768-769/798-799 MHz band, which is designated as a guard 
band under Commission rules to minimize the potential for interference 
between the broadband and narrowband segments of the 700 MHz public 
safety band. Observing that the transfer of the broadband spectrum to 
FirstNet does nothing to mitigate these concerns, the Commission 
proposed to maintain the designation of this spectrum as a guard band 
and keep in place all associated restrictions on its use. The 
Commission sought comment on this proposal, and on whether the 
possibility of broadband operations eventually being permitted in the 
narrowband segment should have any impact on this analysis.
    37. Comments. A number of commenters support preserving the 
designation of the 768-769/798-799 MHz band as a guard band, at least 
during the early stages of public safety

[[Page 593]]

broadband network development. FirstNet recommends that ``[a]t this 
time'' the Commission ``enable the guard band to continue serving as a 
`buffer' between public safety broadband and narrowband spectrum.'' 
Harris agrees and further argues that ``the existing expanded public 
safety broadband allocation should be deployed and subsequent 
evaluation of real-world harmful interference should be evaluated 
before the guard band is allowed to be used.'' Motorola Solutions 
similarly contends that ``[t]he interference concerns that led to the 
establishment of the guard band have not been mitigated'' and that 
``[t]he Commission should take no actions with respect to the guard 
band that would jeopardize the continued interference-free availability 
of the public safety narrowband spectrum.'' The Commonwealth of 
Virginia also asserts that ``a continued guard band is a necessity.''
    38. Some commenters, however, suggest that this spectrum could be 
suitable for limited use, if only within specified parameters. Motorola 
Solutions envisions use of the band for ``localized public safety 
applications'' including ``low power mobile/portable applications that 
would enhance public safety communications while posing little risk of 
interference to adjacent band systems.'' NPSTC meanwhile argues that 
designating this spectrum as a ``home'' for narrowband vehicular 
repeaters currently operated in the public safety broadband spectrum 
could serve as a cost-effective strategy for managing the relocation of 
these operations. FirstNet also cautions that ``[its] plans could 
necessitate a change in the status of the public safety guard bands'' 
to accommodate some operations therein.
    39. Finally, a few commenters contend that FirstNet should retain 
control over the operational parameters of all spectrum licensed to it, 
including the 768-769/798-799 MHz band. APCO argues that FirstNet's 
statutory responsibilities ``extend to the guard bands'' and that the 
Commission should accordingly ``remove the existing guard band 
restrictions and instead leave to FirstNet's discretion as to how to 
address any potential interference issues.'' Similarly, Ericsson 
``supports allowing FirstNet discretion on its use as long as these 
bands function as guard bands to protect narrowband operations.''
    40. Discussion. As an initial matter, we observe that the 
Commission holds authority to adopt regulations aimed at preventing 
public safety broadband network operations from creating interference 
for users in adjacent bands. The operational restrictions that 
currently attach to the 768-769 and 798-799 MHz ``guard band'' were 
adopted to mitigate interference between users in the broadband and 
narrowband segments of the public safety band, and no commenter has 
challenged the Commission's observation that these underlying concerns 
remain valid. In addition, FirstNet itself recommends that the band 
``continue serving as a `buffer' '' between these bands, at least in 
the near term. Accordingly, we will maintain the guard band 
restrictions currently in place for the 768-769 and 798-799 MHz band. 
In a future proceeding we may consider relaxing these restrictions to 
accommodate some operations in this band, such as those commenters 
contemplate, but such matters are not yet ripe for consideration at 
this early stage of network development.
g. Equipment Certification
    41. In the NPRM, the Commission proposed consolidating under Sec.  
90.549 of its rules the requirements governing certification of 
equipment for operation in FirstNet's licensed spectrum. The Commission 
further observed that, under this approach, such certification would be 
subject to consolidated technical rules that had themselves yet to be 
adopted. Accordingly, it suspended OET's acceptance and processing of 
applications for equipment certification in FirstNet's licensed 
spectrum pending the adoption of the necessary technical rules. In 
addition, it sought comment on whether to adopt certification 
requirements specific to this band that would augment the basic 
certification requirements already codified under Sec.  90.549. 
Finally, it proposed removing from its rules a legacy provision, Sec.  
90.203(p), that required applicants for equipment certification in the 
public safety broadband spectrum to demonstrate support for LTE 
interfaces that public safety operators had been required to implement 
under rules no longer in force.
    42. Comments. In general, commenters support the specific proposals 
regarding equipment certification set forth in the NPRM. Those 
commenters that addressed these matters support the proposed 
consolidation of requirements under Sec.  90.549 and the proposed 
deletion of Sec.  90.203(p). With respect to the proposed rule 
consolidation, General Dynamics further observes that ``[t]he inclusion 
of the D Block frequency in this section will have the benefit of 
eliminating duplicative certification processes, thereby reducing 
cost.''
    43. As noted earlier, a substantial number of commenters, including 
FirstNet, contend that urgent Commission action is necessary to ensure 
that equipment is made available for operations in FirstNet's licensed 
spectrum on an expedited basis. FirstNet explains that ``there is an 
imminent need for authorized equipment to meet the needs of 
jurisdictions that may deploy early'' in its licensed spectrum under 
lease agreements. Motorola Solutions similarly notes that ``[t]here is 
already a demand'' for authorized equipment ``that will increase as 
FirstNet progresses towards deployment of the nationwide public safety 
broadband network,'' and that ``[t]he halt in equipment authorizations 
is impacting product development schedules for devices being designed 
to meet this demand.'' Ericsson further argues that ``delays in 
certifying equipment hampe[r] the access to new and potentially life-
saving technologies by the public safety community.'' Some commenters, 
including APCO and Harris, offer proposals for expediting the 
availability of equipment for use in this band prior to the adoption of 
technical service rules. APCO recommends ``issuance of an earlier order 
that focuses on [equipment certification] to avoid further 
interruptions in the development of equipment necessary for [network] 
operations.'' Harris, meanwhile, recommends that the Commission permit 
equipment with existing certifications already granted under the 
provisions of its 2010 waiver order, and equipment subsequently 
certified to be compliant with that order's technical requirements, to 
be authorized for use by early adopter networks while the Commission 
continues to develop technical service rules to permit the 
certification of equipment. Harris clarifies, however, that all 
equipment operated in the band should be subject to the rules 
ultimately adopted ``to ensure interoperability and [a] multi-vendor 
environment.''
    44. A few commenters also urge the Commission to refrain from 
adopting any band-specific requirements that would augment the more 
basic requirements for equipment certification established under Sec.  
90.549. On this point, Motorola Solutions observes that ``[s]imilar to 
any commercial system operator, FirstNet has the right to impose 
additional requirements on equipment vendors to support specified 
features, protocols and applications'' and that ``[s]ubjecting future 
enhancements and refinements to the

[[Page 594]]

Commission's rulemaking process would add unnecessary delay to 
providing public safety with devices that have the latest features and 
functionality.''
    45. Discussion. Our adoption in the Second R&O of consolidated 
public safety broadband technical service rules sets the stage for 
equipment certifications to commence in this band. Commenters widely 
support the Commission's proposal to unify the equipment certification 
requirements for this band under Sec.  90.549, without further 
modification. We accordingly consolidate this rule as proposed and 
direct the Office of Engineering and Technology to certify equipment in 
this band consistent with the technical rules adopted in the Second 
R&O, as soon as these rules become effective. We also delete Sec.  
90.203(p) as proposed in the NPRM.
    46. Moreover, as explained in more detail below, we will make the 
Second R&O effective January 6, 2014. Such action will expedite the 
Commission's ability to process applications for equipment 
certification under the newly consolidated rules, thereby obviating the 
need for adoption of interim measures such as those APCO and Harris 
propose.
h. Miscellaneous Proposals From the Comment Record
    47. AT&T's Proposed Rule on Adherence to Commercial Standards. AT&T 
proposes that, in addition to consolidating existing technical rules 
under part 90, the Commission should adopt ``a catch-all rule to ensure 
that the public safety broadband network operates in accordance with 
`commercial standards' as defined [by statute].'' Motorola Solutions 
opposes the adoption of such a rule, arguing that it ``may hinder 
FirstNet's ability to promote the development and use of public safety 
applications and devices that do not conform precisely to commercial 
standards.''
    48. AT&T concedes that many of the specific technical rules 
proposed in the NPRM align with requirements applicable to commercial 
spectrum bands, but it asserts that its proposed rule ``would serve to 
fill any unintended gaps in the other rules, provide important context 
for construing any ambiguities in the other rules, and plainly place 
the Commission in step with the mission of other governments entities 
charged with implementing [the statute].'' The rule it proposes, 
however, largely recites general principles set forth by statute and, 
as such, would not appear to place any affirmative restriction on the 
conduct of FirstNet or any other entity in deploying and operating the 
network. Any such restriction the rule might impose, on the other hand, 
may exceed the scope of the NPRM, which did not expressly seek comment 
on proposals to implement the statutory requirement that FirstNet base 
its network on ``commercial standards,'' or on how this requirement of 
the Spectrum Act should be construed in this context. We thus decline 
to adopt AT&T's proposal.
    49. Harris's Proposed Regulatory Classification of LTE Base 
Stations. Harris proposes that the Commission's public safety broadband 
service rules ``establish distinct definitions and rules for different 
types of base stations . . . in a manner consistent with 3GPP 
definitions and technical specifications.'' In particular, Harris 
recommends the adoption of distinct transmitter power and minimum 
coupling loss (MCL) restrictions for ``Wide area,'' ``Medium area,'' 
``Local area,'' and ``Home'' base stations, at levels defined by the 
LTE standard. Specialized requirements for various base station classes 
are necessary, Harris asserts, ``to ensure that minimum technical 
requirements are placed on each of the classes while minimizing cost 
and harmful interference potential.''
    50. The technical rules we are establishing for FirstNet's licensed 
spectrum include power limits and other technical requirements aimed at 
mitigating the interference potential of operations in FirstNet's 
licensed spectrum. These protections are well-established and enjoy 
broad record support, and, as some commenters have observed, they are 
generally aligned with the technical service rules that apply to 700 
MHz commercial LTE services. We do not find that Harris has made the 
case for codifying a distinct and potentially conflicting set of rules 
for FirstNet's licensed spectrum based directly on LTE design 
specifications, which themselves may evolve over time. Accordingly, we 
decline to adopt Harris's proposal.
2. Further Rule Consolidations
    51. In addition to its proposed consolidation of technical service 
rules, the Commission proposed additional minor rule revisions 
necessary to remove the D Block from the reach of part 27 and place it 
within the purview of part 90. The only commenters to address these 
proposed revisions support them. We accordingly adopt the proposals. We 
also requested comment more generally on ``the development of a unified 
set of rules for the expanded public safety broadband allocation,'' and 
Motorola Solutions identified for revision two additional ``non-
substantive'' part 27 references to the D Block. We agree that these 
changes to reflect the new statutory mandate with respect to the D 
Block are purely ministerial, and we adopt such revisions as well.
    52. The Commission also proposed minor revisions to Sec. Sec.  
2.103, 90.179 and 90.523 of its rules to omit references to the defunct 
Public Safety Broadband Licensee. The few commenters that addressed any 
of these proposed revisions support them. We accordingly adopt these 
proposals as well.

Procedural Matters

A. Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    1. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the 
Commission has prepared this Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 
(FRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on small entities of 
rules adopted in the Second R&O in PS Docket No. 12-94. The Commission 
sought comment on such impact in an Initial Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis (IRFA) prepared in connection with the NPRM in which the rules 
were proposed. No commenters directly responded to the IRFA.

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

    2. In the Second R&O, the Commission adopts a unified set of 
technical service rules for the spectrum licensed to the First 
Responder Network Authority (FirstNet) for purposes of establishing a 
nationwide 700 MHz public safety broadband network. This unification 
primarily involves merging into part 90 of the Commission's rules a 
number of technical requirements that had been codified separately in 
parts 27 and 90 for the two respective segments of FirstNet's licensed 
spectrum, the ``public safety broadband spectrum'' (763-768/793-798 
MHz) and the ``D Block'' (758-763/788-793 MHz). Such action will 
further ``facilitate[s] the transition'' of spectrum to FirstNet for 
its use in establishing a nationwide wireless broadband communications 
network for our Nation's first responders. In particular, the adoption 
of consolidated rules for FirstNet's licensed spectrum will enable the 
Commission to start certifying equipment for operation in this spectrum 
under the technical rules established for the combined band.

C. Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Comments in Response to IRFA

    3. No commenters directly responded to the IRFA. A number of 
commenters

[[Page 595]]

expressed support in general for the consolidation of technical rules 
that we effect in the Second R&O. Also, no commenters expressed the 
view that such consolidation of rules would have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities.

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

    4. 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 rules adopted herein. The RFA generally defines the 
term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms ``small 
business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental 
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same 
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business 
Act. A ``small business concern'' is one which: (1) Is independently 
owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and 
(3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business 
Administration (``SBA''). Below, we further describe and estimate the 
number of small entity licensees and regulatees that may be affected by 
the rules changes we propose in the NPRM.
    5. Small Businesses, Small Organizations, and Small Governmental 
Jurisdictions. Our action may, over time, affect small entities that 
are not easily categorized at present. We therefore describe here, at 
the outset, three comprehensive, statutory small entity size standards. 
First, nationwide, there are a total of approximately 27.5 million 
small businesses, according to the SBA. In addition, a ``small 
organization'' is generally ``any not-for-profit enterprise which is 
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.'' 
Nationwide, as of 2007, there were approximately 1,621,315 small 
organizations. Finally, the term ``small governmental jurisdiction'' is 
defined generally as ``governments of cities, towns, townships, 
villages, school districts, or special districts, with a population of 
less than fifty thousand.'' Census Bureau data for 2011 indicate that 
there were 89,476 local governmental jurisdictions in the United 
States. We estimate that, of this total, as many as 88,506 entities may 
qualify as ``small governmental jurisdictions.'' Thus, we estimate that 
most governmental jurisdictions are small.
    6. Public Safety Radio Licensees. As a general matter, Public 
Safety Radio Pool licensees include police, fire, local government, 
forestry conservation, highway maintenance, and emergency medical 
services. Because of the vast array of public safety licensees, the 
Commission has not developed a small business size standard 
specifically applicable to public safety licensees. The SBA rules 
contain a definition for Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except 
Satellite) which encompasses business entities engaged in 
radiotelephone communications employing no more than 1,500 persons. 
With respect to local governments, in particular, since many 
governmental entities comprise the licensees for these services, we 
include under public safety services the number of government entities 
affected. According to Commission records, there are a total of 
approximately 133,870 licenses within these services. There are 2,442 
licenses in the 4.9 GHz band, based on an FCC Universal Licensing 
System search of May 23, 2012. We estimate that fewer than 2,442 public 
safety radio licensees hold these licenses because certain entities may 
have multiple licenses.
    7. We observe, however, that ``small governmental jurisdictions''--
regardless of their status as Public Safety Radio Pool licensees--are 
ineligible to hold direct Commission authorizations to operate in the 
spectrum licensed to FirstNet. By statute, FirstNet is charged with 
constructing, operating and maintaining public safety broadband network 
in this spectrum on a nationwide basis, under a nationwide license. 
Accordingly, we do not believe the technical service rules adopted in 
the Second R&O to govern operations in this spectrum will directly 
affect a substantial number of small entities, and that it is thus 
unnecessary to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis in connection 
with these requirements. Nevertheless, to the extent such rules could 
be construed as having a direct effect on a substantial number of small 
entities, we estimate that the economic impact on any entity would be 
minimal. This is because the rules adopted in the Second R&O largely 
involve unifying under a single set of part 90 provisions a number of 
already existing technical requirements that had been codified in 
disparate rule sections.
    8. The Second R&O does, however, establish rules governing 
equipment certification, which would apply directly to equipment 
manufacturers or other entities seeking to certify equipment for use in 
FirstNet's licensed spectrum. The SBA category that includes such 
entities is that of ``Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless 
Communications Equipment Manufacturing,'' which the Census Bureau 
defines 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. According to Census bureau data for 
2007, there were a total of 919 firms in this category that operated 
for the entire year. Of this total, 771 had less than 100 employees and 
148 had more than 100 employees. Thus, under that size standard, the 
majority of firms can be considered small.

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

    9. The technical service rules adopted in the Second R&O largely 
involve consolidating a number of parallel part 27 and part 90 rules 
within the latter rule part, so as to subject FirstNet's licensed 
spectrum to a unified set of rules. Because FirstNet is the nationwide 
licensee in this spectrum, it will be primarily responsible on a 
nationwide basis for complying with any such requirements that are 
ultimately adopted. Accordingly, as discussed, we do not believe that 
these requirements would have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.
    10. The Second R&O also establishes certification requirements for 
equipment operated in the combined public safety broadband spectrum and 
directs the Commission's Office of Engineering and Technology (OET) to 
process certifications under the newly consolidated rules. These 
certification requirements will be applicable to entities, such as 
equipment manufacturers, seeking to certify equipment for operation in 
this spectrum. However, as we observed in the IRFA, equipment 
certification is a longstanding Commission practice, widely applicable 
to equipment marketed for operation in radiospectrum licensed by the 
Commission. As the Commission further anticipated in the IRFA, the 
equipment certification rules

[[Page 596]]

adopted in the Second R&O do not depart significantly from current 
practice in this area. Indeed, the rules merely consolidate equipment 
certification requirements already applicable to the two respective 
segments of FirstNet's licensed spectrum. We do not believe that such 
consolidation would have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities.

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

    11. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant 
alternatives that it has considered in developing its approach, which 
may include the following four alternatives (among others): ``(1) the 
establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or 
timetables that take into account the resources available to small 
entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of 
compliance and reporting requirements under the rule for such small 
entities; (3) the use of performance rather than design standards; and 
(4) an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for 
such small entities.''
    12. As previously discussed, the rules adopted in the Second R&O 
already involve the ``consolidation'' of existing requirements into a 
unified set of part 90 provisions. We believe that such action will 
help facilitate the efforts in deploying the network, and there is no 
reason to believe that such rule consolidation would impose a 
significant economic impact on small entities.
    13. We also do not believe it would be tenable to establish 
differing requirements for small entities or to exempt such entities 
from rules adopted in the Second R&O, including rules governing 
equipment certification. Given the importance of ensuring that the 
public safety broadband network is technically and operationally viable 
on a nationwide basis, it is important that the network be governed by 
a common set of rules and requirements and that all equipment operated 
in the network be subject to common certification procedures.

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

    14. None.
Effective Date
    Section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act generally requires 
publication of a rule in the Federal Register at least thirty days 
before it goes into effect, but not when an agency otherwise finds and 
publishes ``good cause'' for an earlier effective date. We believe 
there is good cause for making such rules effective immediately upon 
publication. As noted above, in our NPRM we suspended OET's acceptance 
and processing of applications for equipment certification in this band 
pending the adoption of the foregoing technical rules against which to 
evaluate such equipment. With several near-term deployments now planned 
in FirstNet's licensed spectrum, some under lease agreements that have 
already been executed, it is essential that the Commission commence its 
equipment certification process for this band as soon as possible, 
particularly in light of the clear public safety benefits resulting 
from such proposed deployments. Because the rules we adopt in the 
Second R&O will provide the foundation for this certification process, 
expediting their effective date is necessary to prevent delay in the 
availability of equipment for operation in FirstNet's licensed 
spectrum. We will therefore make the Second Report and Order effective 
January 6, 2014.
Congressional Review Act
    The Bureau will send a copy of the Report and Order to Congress and 
the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional 
Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).

List of Subjects

47 CFR Part 1

    Administrative practice and procedure, Civil rights, Claims, 
Communications common carriers, Cuba, Drug abuse, Environmental impact 
statements, Equal access to justice, Equal employment opportunity, 
Federal buildings and facilities, Government employees, Income taxes, 
Indemnity payments, Individuals with disabilities, Investigations, 
Lawyers, Metric system, Penalties, Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Satellites, Telecommunications, Television, Wages.

47 CFR Part 2

    Communications equipment, Disaster assistance, Imports, Radio, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Telecommunications, 
Television, Wiretapping and electronic surveillance.

47 CFR Part 27

    Communications common carriers, Radio.

47 CFR Part 90

    Administrative practice and procedure, Business and industry, Civil 
defense, Common carriers, Communications equipment, Emergency medical 
services, Individuals with disabilities, Radio, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission amends 47 CFR parts 1, 2, 27 and 90 as 
follows:

PART 1--PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

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

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 79 et seq.; 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 
155, 157, 225, 227, 303(r), 309, 1403, 1404, and 1451.


0
2. Section 1.9005 is amended by revising paragraph (k) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  1.9005  Included services.

* * * * *
    (k) The Wireless Communications Service in the 746-758 MHz, 775-788 
MHz, and 805-806 MHz bands (part 27 of this chapter);
* * * * *

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

0
3. The authority citation for part 2 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 302(a), 303, and 336, unless otherwise 
noted.


0
4. Section 2.103 is amended by revising paragraph (a) introductory text 
and paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec.  2.103  Federal use of non-Federal frequencies.

    (a) Federal stations may be authorized to use non-Federal 
frequencies in the bands above 25 MHz (except the 758-775 MHz and 788-
805 MHz public safety bands) if the Commission finds that such use is 
necessary for coordination of Federal and non-Federal activities: 
Provided, however, that:
* * * * *
    (c) Federal stations may be authorized by the First Responder 
Network Authority to use channels in the 758-769 MHz and 788-799 MHz 
public safety bands.

[[Page 597]]

PART 27--MISCELLANEOUS WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES

0
5. The authority citation for part 27 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 301, 302a, 303, 307, 309, 332, 336, 
337, 1403, 1404, and 1451 unless otherwise noted.


0
6. Section 27.6 is amended by revising paragraph (b) introductory text 
and removing paragraph (b)(3) to read as follows:


Sec.  27.6  Service areas.

* * * * *
    (b) 746-758 MHz, 775-788 MHz, and 805-806 MHz bands. WCS service 
areas for the 746-758 MHz, 775-788 MHz, and 805-806 MHz bands are as 
follows.
* * * * *
0
7. Section 27.11 is amended by revising paragraph (c) introductory text 
and removing paragraph (c)(4) to read as follows:


Sec.  27.11  Initial authorization.

* * * * *
    (c) 746-758 MHz, 775-788 MHz, and 805-806 MHz bands. Initial 
authorizations for the 746-758 MHz, 775-788 MHz, and 805-806 MHz bands 
shall be for paired channels of 1, 5, 6, or 11 megahertz of spectrum in 
accordance with Sec.  27.5(b).
* * * * *


0
8. Section 27.13 is amended by revising the first sentence in paragraph 
(b) to read as follows:


Sec.  27.13  License period.

* * * * *
    (b) 698-758 MHz, 776-788, 775-776, and 805-806 MHz bands. Initial 
authorizations for the 698-758 MHz and 776-788 MHz bands will extend 
for a term not to exceed ten years from June 13, 2009, except that 
initial authorizations for a part 27 licensee that provides broadcast 
services, whether exclusively or in combination with other services, 
will not exceed eight years. * * *
* * * * *

0
9. Section 27.14 is amended by revising the first sentence in paragraph 
(a) and the first sentence in paragraph (e), and removing and reserving 
paragraphs (m) and (n), to read as follows:


Sec.  27.14  Construction requirements; Criteria for renewal.

    (a) AWS and WCS licensees, with the exception of WCS licensees 
holding authorizations for Block A in the 698-704 MHz and 728-734 MHz 
bands, Block B in the 704-710 MHz and 734-740 MHz bands, Block E in the 
722-728 MHz band, Block C, C1 or C2 in the 746-757 MHz and 776-787 MHz 
bands, Block A in the 2305-2310 MHz and 2350-2355 MHz bands, Block B in 
the 2310-2315 MHz and 2355-2360 MHz bands, Block C in the 2315-2320 MHz 
band, and Block D in the 2345-2350 MHz band, and with the exception of 
licensees holding AWS authorizations in the 1915-1920 MHz and 1995-2000 
MHz bands or the 2000-2020 MHz and 2180-2200 MHz bands, must, as a 
performance requirement, make a showing of ``substantial service'' in 
their license area within the prescribed license term set forth in 
Sec.  27.13. * * *
* * * * *
    (e) Comparative renewal proceedings do not apply to WCS licensees 
holding authorizations for Block A in the 698-704 MHz and 728-734 MHz 
bands, Block B in the 704-710 MHz and 734-740 MHz bands, Block C in the 
710-716 MHz and 740-746 MHz bands, Block D in the 716-722 MHz band, 
Block E in the 722-728 MHz band, or Block C, C1 or C2 in the 746-757 
MHz and 776-787 MHz bands. * * *
* * * * *

0
10. Section 27.15 is amended by revising the first sentence in 
paragraphs (d)(1)(i) and (d)(2)(i) to read as follows:


Sec.  27.15  Geographic partitioning and spectrum disaggregation.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) Except for WCS licensees holding authorizations for Block A in 
the 698-704 MHz and 728-734 MHz bands, Block B in the 704-710 MHz and 
734-740 MHz bands, Block E in the 722-728 MHz band, or Blocks C, C1, 
and C2 in the 746-757 MHz and 776-787 MHz bands; and for licensees 
holding AWS authorizations in the 1915-1920 MHz and 1995-2000 MHz bands 
or the 2000-2020 MHz and 2180-2200 MHz bands; the following rules apply 
to WCS and AWS licensees holding authorizations for purposes of 
implementing the construction requirements set forth in Sec.  27.14. * 
* *
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) Except for WCS licensees holding authorizations for Block A in 
the 698-704 MHz and 728-734 MHz bands, Block B in the 704-710 MHz and 
734-740 MHz bands, Block E in the 722-728 MHz band, or Blocks C, C1, 
and C2 in the 746-757 MHz and 776-787 MHz bands; and for licensees 
holding AWS authorizations in the 1915-1920 MHz and 1995-2000 MHz bands 
or the 2000-2020 MHz and 2180-2200 MHz bands; the following rules apply 
to WCS and AWS licensees holding authorizations for purposes of 
implementing the construction requirements set forth in Sec.  27.14. * 
* *
* * * * *

0
11. Section 27.20 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  27.20  Digital television transition education reports.

    (a) The requirements of this section shall apply only with regard 
to WCS license authorizations in Block A in the 698-704 MHz and 728-734 
MHz bands, Block B in the 704-710 MHz and 734-740 MHz bands, Block E in 
the 722-728 MHz band, and Block C, C1 or C2 in the 746-757 MHz and 776-
787 MHz bands.
* * * * *

0
12. Section 27.50 is amended by revising paragraph (b) introductory 
text, paragraphs (b)(2) through (b)(6), (b)(7) introductory text, 
(b)(7)(i), (b)(8) through (b)(10), (b)(12), (c)(5)(i), and the headings 
to Table 1 through Table 4 below paragraph (i) to read as follows:


Sec.  27.50  Power limits and duty cycle.

* * * * *
    (b) The following power and antenna height limits apply to 
transmitters operating in the 746-758 MHz, 775-788 MHz and 805-806 MHz 
bands:
* * * * *
    (2) Fixed and base stations transmitting a signal in the 746-757 
MHz and 776-787 MHz bands with an emission bandwidth of 1 MHz or less 
must not exceed an ERP of 1000 watts and an antenna height of 305 m 
HAAT, except that antenna heights greater than 305 m HAAT are permitted 
if power levels are reduced below 1000 watts ERP in accordance with 
Table 1 of this section.
    (3) Fixed and base stations located in a county with population 
density of 100 or fewer persons per square mile, based upon the most 
recently available population statistics from the Bureau of the Census, 
and transmitting a signal in the 746-757 MHz and 776-787 MHz bands with 
an emission bandwidth of 1 MHz or less must not exceed an ERP of 2000 
watts and an antenna height of 305 m HAAT, except that antenna heights 
greater than 305 m HAAT are permitted if power levels are reduced below 
2000 watts ERP in accordance with Table 2 of this section.
    (4) Fixed and base stations transmitting a signal in the 746-757 
MHz and 776-787 MHz bands with an emission bandwidth greater than 1 MHz 
must not exceed an ERP of 1000 watts/MHz and an antenna height of 305 m 
HAAT, except that antenna heights

[[Page 598]]

greater than 305 m HAAT are permitted if power levels are reduced below 
1000 watts/MHz ERP in accordance with Table 3 of this section.
    (5) Fixed and base stations located in a county with population 
density of 100 or fewer persons per square mile, based upon the most 
recently available population statistics from the Bureau of the Census, 
and transmitting a signal in the 746-757 MHz and 776-787 MHz bands with 
an emission bandwidth greater than 1 MHz must not exceed an ERP of 2000 
watts/MHz and an antenna height of 305 m HAAT, except that antenna 
heights greater than 305 m HAAT are permitted if power levels are 
reduced below 2000 watts/MHz ERP in accordance with Table 4 of this 
section.
    (6) Licensees of fixed or base stations transmitting a signal in 
the 746-757 MHz and 776-787 MHz bands at an ERP greater than 1000 watts 
must comply with the provisions set forth in paragraph (b)(8) of this 
section and Sec.  27.55(c).
    (7) Licensees seeking to operate a fixed or base station located in 
a county with population density of 100 or fewer persons per square 
mile, based upon the most recently available population statistics from 
the Bureau of the Census, and transmitting a signal in the 746-757 MHz 
and 776-787 MHz bands at an ERP greater than 1000 watts must:
    (i) Coordinate in advance with all licensees authorized to operate 
in the 698-758 MHz, 775-788, and 805-806 MHz bands within 120 
kilometers (75 miles) of the base or fixed station;
* * * * *
    (8) Licensees authorized to transmit in the 746-757 MHz and 776-787 
MHz bands and intending to operate a base or fixed station at a power 
level permitted under the provisions of paragraph (b)(6) of this 
section must provide advanced notice of such operation to the 
Commission and to licensees authorized in their area of operation. 
Licensees who must be notified are all licensees authorized to operate 
in the 758-775 MHz and 788-805 MHz bands under part 90 of this chapter 
within 75 km of the base or fixed station and all regional planning 
committees, as identified in Sec.  90.527 of this chapter, with 
jurisdiction within 75 km of the base or fixed station. Notifications 
must provide the location and operating parameters of the base or fixed 
station, including the station's ERP, antenna coordinates, antenna 
height above ground, and vertical antenna pattern, and such 
notifications must be provided at least 90 days prior to the 
commencement of station operation.
    (9) Control stations and mobile stations transmitting in the 746-
757 MHz, 776-788 MHz, and 805-806 MHz bands and fixed stations 
transmitting in the 787-788 MHz and 805-806 MHz bands are limited to 30 
watts ERP.
    (10) Portable stations (hand-held devices) transmitting in the 746-
757 MHz, 776-788 MHz, and 805-806 MHz bands are limited to 3 watts ERP.
* * * * *
    (12) For transmissions in the 746-757 and 776-787 MHz bands, 
licensees may employ equipment operating in compliance with either the 
measurement techniques described in paragraph (b)(11) of this section 
or a Commission-approved average power technique. In both instances, 
equipment employed must be authorized in accordance with the provisions 
of Sec.  27.51.
    (c) * * *
    (5) * * *
    (i) Coordinate in advance with all licensees authorized to operate 
in the 698-758 MHz, 775-788, and 805-806 MHz bands within 120 
kilometers (75 miles) of the base or fixed station;
* * * * *
    (i) * * *

    Table 1--Permissible Power and Antenna Heights for Base and Fixed
  Stations in the 757-758 and 775-776 MHz Bands and for Base and Fixed
 Stations in the 698-757 MHz and 776-787 MHz Bands Transmitting a Signal
               With an Emission Bandwidth of 1 MHz or Less
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Table 2--Permissible Power and Antenna Heights for Base and Fixed
 Stations in the 698-757 MHz and 776-787 MHz Bands Transmitting a Signal
               With an Emission Bandwidth of 1 MHz or Less
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Table 3--Permissible Power and Antenna Heights for Base and Fixed
 Stations in the 698-757 MHz and 776-787 MHz Bands Transmitting a Signal
              With an Emission Bandwidth Greater than 1 MHz
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Table 4--Permissible Power and Antenna Heights for Base and Fixed
 Stations in the 698-757 MHz and 776-787 MHz Bands Transmitting a Signal
              With an Emission Bandwidth Greater than 1 MHz
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------


0
13. Section 27.53 is amended by removing paragraph (d), redesignating 
paragraphs (e) through (n) as paragraphs (d) through (m), and revising 
newly redesignated paragraphs (d) introductory text, (d)(1), (d)(2) and 
(e) to read as follows:


Sec.  27.53  Emission limits.

* * * * *
    (d) For operations in the 775-776 MHz and 805-806 MHz bands, 
transmitters must comply with either paragraphs (d)(1) through (5) of 
this section or the ACP emission limitations

[[Page 599]]

set forth in paragraphs (d)(6) to (d)(9) of this section.
    (1) On all frequencies between 758-775 MHz and 788-805 MHz, the 
power of any emission outside the licensee's frequency bands of 
operation shall be attenuated below the transmitter power (P) within 
the licensed band(s) of operation, measured in watts, by a factor not 
less than 76 + 10 log (P) dB in a 6.25 kHz band segment, for base and 
fixed stations;
    (2) On all frequencies between 758-775 MHz and 788-805 MHz, the 
power of any emission outside the licensee's frequency bands of 
operation shall be attenuated below the transmitter power (P) within 
the licensed band(s) of operation, measured in watts, by a factor not 
less than 65 + 10 log (P) dB in a 6.25 kHz band segment, for mobile and 
portable stations;
* * * * *
    (e) For operations in the 746-758 MHz, 775-788 MHz, and 805-806 MHz 
bands, emissions in the band 1559-1610 MHz shall be limited to -70 dBW/
MHz equivalent isotropically radiated power (EIRP) for wideband 
signals, and -80 dBW EIRP for discrete emissions of less than 700 Hz 
bandwidth. For the purpose of equipment authorization, a transmitter 
shall be tested with an antenna that is representative of the type that 
will be used with the equipment in normal operation.
* * * * *

0
14. Section 27.55 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  27.55  Power strength limits.

* * * * *
    (c) Power flux density limit for stations operating in the 746-757 
MHz and 776-787 MHz bands. For base and fixed stations operating in the 
746-757 MHz and 776-787 MHz bands in accordance with the provisions of 
Sec.  27.50(b)(6), the power flux density that would be produced by 
such stations through a combination of antenna height and vertical gain 
pattern must not exceed 3000 microwatts per square meter on the ground 
over the area extending to 1 km from the base of the antenna mounting 
structure.

0
15. Section 27.57 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  27.57  International coordination.

* * * * *
    (b) Operation in the 698-758 MHz, 775-788 MHz, and 805-806 MHz 
bands is subject to international agreements between Mexico and Canada. 
Unless otherwise modified by international treaty, licenses must not 
cause interference to, and must accept harmful interference from, 
television broadcast operations in Mexico and Canada.
* * * * *

0
16. Section 27.60 is amended by revising the introductory text, 
paragraph (a)(1)(iii), the second sentence in paragraph (b) 
introductory text, the first sentence in paragraph (b)(2)(i), paragraph 
(b)(2)(ii) introductory text, and paragraphs (b)(2)(ii)(A) and (C) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  27.60  TV/DTV interference protection criteria.

    Base, fixed, control, and mobile transmitters in the 698-758 MHz, 
775-788 MHz, and 805-806 MHz frequency bands must be operated only in 
accordance with the rules in this section to reduce the potential for 
interference to public reception of the signals of existing TV and DTV 
broadcast stations transmitting on TV Channels 51 through 68.
    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iii) For transmitters operating in the 746-758 MHz, 775-788 MHz, 
and 805-806 MHz frequency bands, 17 dB at the equivalent Grade B 
contour (41 dB[micro]V/m) (88.5 kilometers (55 miles)) of the DTV 
station.
* * * * *
    (b) * * * Tables to determine the necessary minimum distance from 
the 698-758 MHz, 775-788 MHz, and 805-806 MHz station to the TV/DTV 
station, assuming that the TV/DTV station has a hypothetical or 
equivalent Grade B contour of 88.5 kilometers (55 miles), are located 
in Sec.  90.309 of this chapter and labeled as Tables B, D, and E. * * 
*
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) Base and fixed stations that operate in the 746-758 MHz and 
775-787 MHz bands having an antenna height (HAAT) less than 152 m. (500 
ft.) shall afford protection to co-channel and adjacent channel TV/DTV 
stations in accordance with the values specified in Table B (co-channel 
frequencies based on 40 dB protection) and Table E (adjacent channel 
frequencies based on 0 dB protection) in Sec.  90.309 of this chapter. 
* * *
    (ii) Control, fixed, and mobile stations (including portables) that 
operate in the 787-788 MHz and 805-806 MHz bands and control and mobile 
stations (including portables) that operate in the 698-757 MHz and 776-
787 MHz bands are limited in height and power and therefore shall 
afford protection to co-channel and adjacent channel TV/DTV stations in 
the following manner:
    (A) For control, fixed, and mobile stations (including portables) 
that operate in the 787-788 MHz and 805-806 MHz bands and control and 
mobile stations (including portables) that operate in the 746-757 MHz 
and 776-787 MHz bands, co-channel protection shall be afforded in 
accordance with the values specified in Table D (co-channel frequencies 
based on 40 dB protection for TV stations and 17 dB for DTV stations) 
in Sec.  90.309 of this chapter.
* * * * *
    (C) For control, fixed, and mobile stations (including portables) 
that operate in the 787-788 MHz and 805-806 MHz bands and control and 
mobile stations (including portables) that operate in the 698-757 MHz 
and 776-787 MHz bands, adjacent channel protection shall be afforded by 
providing a minimum distance of 8 kilometers (5 miles) from all 
adjacent channel TV/DTV station hypothetical or equivalent Grade B 
contours (adjacent channel frequencies based on 0 dB protection for TV 
stations and -23 dB for DTV stations).
* * * * *

0
17. Section 27.70 is amended by revising paragraph (a) introductory 
text, and paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) to read as follows:


Sec.  27.70  Information exchange.

    (a) Prior notification. Public safety licensees authorized to 
operate in the 758-775 MHz and 788-805 MHz bands may notify any 
licensee authorized to operate in the 746-757 or 776-787 MHz bands that 
they wish to receive prior notification of the activation or 
modification of the licensee's base or fixed stations in their area. 
Thereafter, the 746-757 or 776-787 MHz band licensee must provide the 
following information to the public safety licensee at least 10 
business days before a new base or fixed station is activated or an 
existing base or fixed station is modified:
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) Allow a public safety licensee to advise the 746-757 or 776-787 
MHz band licensee whether it believes a proposed base or fixed station 
will generate unacceptable interference;
    (2) Permit 746-757 and 776-787 MHz band licensees to make voluntary 
changes in base or fixed station parameters when a public safety 
licensee alerts them to possible interference; and,
* * * * *

0
18. Section 27.303 is amended by revising paragraph (a) introductory 
text to read as follows:

[[Page 600]]

Sec.  27.303  Upper 700 MHz commercial and public safety coordination 
zone.

    (a) General. CMRS operators are required, prior to commencing 
operations on fixed or base station transmitters on the 776-787 MHz 
band that are located within 500 meters of existing or planned public 
safety base station receivers, to submit a description of their 
proposed facility to a Commission-approved public safety coordinator.
* * * * *

0
19. Section 27.501 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  27.501  746-758 MHz, 775-788 MHz, and 805-806 MHz bands subject 
to competitive bidding.

    Mutually exclusive initial applications for licenses in the 746-758 
MHz, 775-788 MHz, and 805-806 MHz bands are subject to competitive 
bidding. The general competitive bidding procedures set forth in part 
1, subpart Q of this chapter will apply unless otherwise provided in 
this subpart.

PART 90--PRIVATE LAND MOBILE RADIO SERVICES

0
20. The authority citation for part 90 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: Sections 4(i), 11, 303(g), 303(r), and 332(c)(7) of 
the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 161, 
303(g), 303(r), and 332(c)(7), and Title VI of the Middle Class Tax 
Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, Pub. L. 112-96, 126 Stat. 156.


0
21. Section 90.179 is amended by revising paragraph (g) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  90.179  Shared use of radio stations.

* * * * *
    (g) Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this section, licensees 
authorized to operate radio systems on Public Safety Pool frequencies 
designated in Sec.  90.20 may share their facilities with Federal 
Government entities on a non-profit, cost-shared basis. Such a sharing 
arrangement is subject to the provisions of paragraphs (b), (d), and 
(e) of this section, and Sec.  2.103(c) of this chapter concerning 
operations in the 758-769 MHz and 788-799 MHz bands. State governments 
authorized to operate radio systems under Sec.  90.529 may share the 
use of their systems (for public safety services not made commercially 
available to the public) with any entity that would be eligible for 
licensing under Sec.  90.523 and Federal government entities.
* * * * *


Sec.  90.203  [Amended]

0
22. Section 90.203 is amended by removing paragraph (p) and 
redesignating paragraph (q) as paragraph (p).

0
23. Section 90.205 is amended by revising paragraph (j) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  90.205  Power and antenna height limits.

* * * * *
    (j) 758-775 MHz and 788-805 MHz. Power and height limitations are 
specified in Sec. Sec.  90.541 and 90.542.
* * * * *

0
24. Section 90.523 is amended by revising the introductory text and 
paragraph (e), to read as follows:


Sec.  90.523  Eligibility.

    This section implements the definition of public safety services 
contained in 47 U.S.C. 337(f)(1). The following are eligible to hold 
Commission authorizations for systems operating in the 769-775 MHz and 
799-805 MHz frequency bands:
* * * * *
    (e) A nationwide license for the 758-769 MHz and 788-799 MHz bands 
shall be issued to the First Responder Network Authority.

0
25. Section 90.533 is amended by revising the introductory text and 
paragraphs (a) and (c) to read as follows:


Sec.  90.533  Transmitting sites near the U.S./Canada or U.S./Mexico 
border.

    This section applies to each license to operate one or more public 
safety transmitters in the 758-775 MHz and 788-805 MHz bands, at a 
location or locations North of Line A (see Sec.  90.7) or within 120 
kilometers (75 miles) of the U.S.-Mexico border, until such time as 
agreements between the government of the United States and the 
government of Canada or the government of the United States and the 
government of Mexico, as applicable, become effective governing border 
area non-broadcast use of these bands. Public safety licenses are 
granted subject to the following conditions:
    (a) Public safety transmitters operating in the 758-775 MHz and 
788-805 MHz bands must conform to the limitations on interference to 
Canadian television stations contained in agreement(s) between the 
United States and Canada for use of television channels in the border 
area.
* * * * *
    (c) Conditions may be added during the term of the license, if 
required by the terms of international agreements between the 
government of the United States and the government of Canada or the 
government of the United States and the government of Mexico, as 
applicable, regarding non-broadcast use of the 758-775 MHz and 788-805 
MHz bands.


Sec.  90.542  [Amended]

0
26. Section 90.542 is amended by revising all references to ``763'' to 
read ``758'' and ``793'' to read ``788'' in paragraph (a) introductory 
text, in paragraphs (a)(1) through (8), in the headers of Tables 1 
through 4, and in paragraph (b).

0
27. Section 90.543 is amended by revising the introductory text, 
revising paragraph (e) introductory text, redesignating paragraph 
(e)(3) as (e)(4), adding new paragraphs (e)(3) and (5), and revising 
paragraph (f) to read as follows:


Sec.  90.543  Emission limitations.

    Transmitters designed to operate in 769-775 MHz and 799-805 MHz 
frequency bands must meet the emission limitations in paragraphs (a) 
through (d) of this section. Transmitters operating in 758-768 MHz and 
788-798 MHz bands must meet the emission limitations in (e) of this 
section.
* * * * *
    (e) For operations in the 758-768 MHz and the 788-798 MHz bands, 
the power of any emission outside the licensee's frequency band(s) of 
operation shall be attenuated below the transmitter power (P) within 
the licensed band(s) of operation, measured in watts, in accordance 
with the following:
* * * * *
    (3) On any frequency between 775-788 MHz, above 805 MHz, and below 
758 MHz, by at least 43 + 10 log (P) dB.
* * * * *
    (5) Compliance with the provisions of paragraph (e)(3) of this 
section is based on the use of measurement instrumentation employing a 
resolution bandwidth of 100 kHz or greater. However, in the 100 kHz 
bands immediately outside and adjacent to the frequency block, a 
resolution bandwidth of 30 kHz may be employed.
    (f) For operations in the 758-775 MHz and 788-805 MHz bands, all 
emissions including harmonics in the band 1559-1610 MHz shall be 
limited to -70 dBW/MHz equivalent isotropically radiated power (EIRP) 
for wideband signals, and -80 dBW EIRP for discrete emissions of less 
than 700 Hz bandwidth. For the purpose of equipment authorization, a 
transmitter shall be tested with an antenna that is representative of 
the type that will be used with the equipment in normal operation.
* * * * *

[[Page 601]]


0
28. Section 90.549 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  90.549  Transmitter certification.

    Transmitters operated in the 758-775 MHz and 788-805 MHz frequency 
bands must be of a type that have been authorized by the Commission 
under its certification procedure as required by Sec.  90.203.

0
29. Section 90.555 is amended by revising paragraph (a) introductory 
text, paragraph (b)(1), paragraph (b)(2), and paragraph (c) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  90.555  Information exchange.

    (a) Prior notification. Public safety licensees authorized to 
operate in the 758-775 MHz and 788-805 MHz bands may notify any 
licensee authorized to operate in the 746-757 MHz or 776-787 MHz bands 
that they wish to receive prior notification of the activation or 
modification of the licensee's base or fixed stations in their area. 
Thereafter, the 746-757 MHz or 776-787 MHz band licensee must provide 
the following information to the public safety licensee at least 10 
business days before a new base or fixed station is activated or an 
existing base or fixed station is modified:
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) Allow a public safety licensee to advise the 746-757 or 776-787 
MHz band licensee whether it believes a proposed base or fixed station 
will generate unacceptable interference;
    (2) Permit 746-757 and 776-787 MHz band licensees to make voluntary 
changes in base or fixed station parameters when a public safety 
licensee alerts them to possible interference; and,
* * * * *
    (c) Public Safety Information Exchange. (1) Upon request by a 746-
757 or 776-787 MHz band licensee, public safety licensees authorized to 
operate radio systems in the 758-775 and 788-805 MHz bands shall 
provide the operating parameters of their radio system to the 746-757 
or 776-787 MHz band licensee.
    (2) Public safety licensees who perform the information exchange 
described in this section must notify the appropriate 746-757 or 776-
787 MHz band licensees prior to any technical changes to their radio 
system.

[FR Doc. 2013-28974 Filed 1-3-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P