FCC Posts Drafts on 3.45-3.55, 4.9 GHz, Other Sept. 30 Items

The draft item on the 3.45-3.55 GHz band portrays it as critical to the future of 5G. “Continued technological developments make 3 GHz spectrum ideal for next generation wireless services, including 5G, and the repurposing of 3.5 GHz and 3.7 GHz band spectrum presents an opportunity to make a large contiguous block of mid-band spectrum available for commercial use,” the draft says.

The order would eliminate the nonfederal radiolocation service and nonfederal amateur allocation in the 3.3-3.5 GHz band but allow incumbent licensees to continue operating in the 3.45-3.55 GHz band until a future date. Users would be moved to the 2.9-3.0 GHz band, “allowing them to continue operating on a secondary basis to federal operations, consistent with current allocations.” Amateur operators would be allowed to “individually determine appropriate alternate spectrum from existing available spectrum allocations.”

A Further NPRM proposes to make 100 MHz of spectrum in the 3.45-3.55 GHz band available for flexible use, including 5G. The FCC seeks comment on adding a “co-primary, non-federal fixed and mobile (except aeronautical mobile) allocation.” It seeks comment on ways to coordinate nonfederal and federal use and proposes a band plan and technical, licensing and competitive bidding rules. It seeks comment on the best way to sunset amateur use in the 3.3-3.5 GHz band.

The draft addresses concerns of amateur radio, which led the opposition to changes. “Amateur licensees have sufficient alternate spectrum bands for their operations, and we will allow these licensees individually to determine for themselves which of these alternative bands is best suited for their operations, rather than specifying a particular replacement spectrum band,” the FCC says. Removal of other uses is necessary “given the incompatibility of radiolocation and amateur operations with ubiquitous mobile and fixed broadband services, which are likely the primary uses pursuant to flexible use licenses,” the draft says.

NTIA sent a letter to the FCC Tuesday on sharing. “This framework establishes a spectrum-sharing solution that allows 5G development to progress in the private sector, while at the same time, allowing the U.S. military to continue to use that spectrum,” said the letter, posted Wednesday. “DoD has agreed to minimize operations in the 3450-3550 MHz band to the extent possible. However, to ensure the preservation of military capabilities, readiness and national security, the military still requires permanent access in a limited number of geographic locations, periodic temporary access to a subset of the permanent access areas, access off the coast by Navy ships at extended ranges, and access wherever required in the event of a national emergency.”

4.9 GHz

The order and FNPRM on the 4.9 GHz band were more of a surprise when announced Tuesday. Under the order, the FCC would permit one statewide 4.9 GHz band licensee per state “to lease some or all of its spectrum rights to third parties, including commercial, critical infrastructure, and other users, thus making up to 50 megahertz of mid-band spectrum available for more intensive use.” States with more than one licensee would have to decide which one will be the state lessor. The band would no longer have to be used for public safety.

The FNPRM proposes new licensing rules, “including making permanent the freeze on new applications implemented on September 8, 2020 and grandfathering all current public safety licensees.” States without a statewide license could get one. The FNPRM seeks comment on creation of a voluntary state band manager to “coordinate and authorize new public safety operations as well as the State Band Manager’s authority and responsibilities” and on “additional ways to implement and facilitate robust use of the leasing framework, including the use of dynamic spectrum sharing and encouraging collaboration across jurisdictions.”

The FCC faced pressure from the Public Safety Spectrum Alliance to allocate the band to FirstNet (see 2008260041). “We find that the leasing framework we adopt today is not inconsistent with 4.9 GHz spectrum being used by FirstNet as a lessee,” the draft says. The alliance and FirstNet didn’t comment.

“Over the past 18 years, the Commission, working with public safety entities and associations, has endeavored to increase investment in, and maximize use of, the band,” the draft says: “These efforts notwithstanding, the 4.9 GHz band remains underused outside of major metropolitan areas, with stakeholders citing high equipment costs and limited availability of broadband equipment, among several barriers to its use. Today, we begin to break down these barriers.”

"We appreciate that the FCC is considering allowing utilities access,” emailed Utilities Technology Council President Sheryl Riggs. “UTC has long identified the 4.9 GHz band as a potential opportunity for utilities to share with public safety. We look forward to engaging with our members and the FCC to determine how this proposal can be improved.”

IP CTS, 911

Pai proposed an order, order on reconsideration and FNPRM cutting IP CTS rates, which would lower the current $1.58 rate to a $1.30 cost-based rate in a two-step process, allowing $1.42 for the remainder of the current fund year and $1.30 for 2021-22. The first cut would be effective Dec. 1. “Extending the current rate is not warranted, as average per-minute costs have declined, not increased, during the COVID pandemic,” the draft says: “The trend of declining per-minute costs appears to have continued in 2020 to date, despite the challenges providers have faced due to the COVID pandemic.”

A second order denies Sprint's request to rethink the interim compensation rates for the telecommunications relay service fund years 2018-19 and 2019-20, “which saved TRS Fund contributors more than $350 million.” The FNPRM seeks comment on “measurable standards for telephone captioning delay and accuracy and … on appropriate metrics” and related issues.

T-Mobile reported on a meeting with staff from Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, Office of Managing Director and Office of Economics and Analytics seeking “a rate freeze or, alternatively, the adoption of a tiered rate structure,” said a filing posted Wednesday in docket 13-24.

The FCC is considering a variety of means to dissuade states from diverting 911 fees, including restrictions on federal 911 grant funding for states that divert 911 fees and conditioning state and local eligibility for FCC licenses, programs, or other benefits on the absence of fee diversion, says the draft notice of inquiry. The NOI asks about the FCC requiring service providers to disclose 911 fee diversion on subscriber bills, using truth-in-billing authority. It seeks comment on what legal authority the FCC might have. The NET 911 Act bars the FCC from stopping states from collecting 911 fees, but nothing in it stops the commission from acting on fee diversion, the commission says.

Robocalls

Under the draft secure telephone identity revisited (Stir) and secure handling of asserted information using tokens (Shaken) implementation order, voice service providers must upgrade non-IP networks to IP and implement the authentication protocol or develop a non-IP caller ID authentication means. It extends the June 30 caller ID authentication implementation deadline for small voice service providers and non-IP networks, barring voice service providers from adding line item charges to the bills of consumer or small-business customer subscribers for caller ID authentication technology. Though the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and Pallone-Thune Telephone Robocall Abuse Criminal Enforcement and Deterrence Act (Traced Act) direct the FCC by June 30 to require voice providers take "reasonable measures" to implement a caller ID authentication framework on the non-IP parts of their networks, many calls outside the Stir/Shaken authentication framework are being made on existing TDM networks, it says.

The FCC disagrees it should bar voice service providers from recouping costs of caller ID authentication and other robocall mitigation solutions entirely because that would go beyond the Traced Act. The agency acknowledges providers face costs for implementation, and some mightn't have the necessary resources.

"It takes two to tango" on retransmission consent and program carriage negotiations, and cable operators can't solely control those negotiations, per the cable service change notification draft order. Cable operators would have to let subscribers know as soon as possible about service changes coming due to retrans or carriage negotiations that fail within 30 days of the end of a contract, instead of having to give 30 days' notice. That cablers aren't in control would be a reversal of the agency's viewpoint. The new view would apply only to retrans or carriage negotiations within that 30-day window of an expiring contract and resulting in a service change.

No one argued cable operator records about the nature and extent of their attributable interests in video programming services are useful or interesting, per the cable attributable interests draft order that would end the requirement. Nor is there any evidence that data was used in a program access complaint, the FCC says: Given the dearth of program access complaints, making operators keep attributable interests records on file flies in the face of axing unnecessary regulatory burdens.

The draft order on coordinating FCC review of applications from foreign-owned companies with DOD, DOJ and the Department of Homeland Security -- Team Telecom -- would establish a 120-day time frame with a possible 90-day extension for reviews, says the draft text. It would also require applicants to make certifications to protect national security and law enforcement interests and to streamline the review process.

The team telecom draft would also require foreign-owned applicants to file responses to “a standardized set of national security and law enforcement questions” that will be developed after another round of public comment, it says. Under the draft order, the FCC would continue to pass on for relevant executive branch agency review broadcast applications for foreign ownership, submarine cable license applications and transfers of Section 214 authorizations. “Knowing which applications will be referred for Executive Branch review, what information is needed by the Executive Branch for its initial review, and when a decision will likely be made enables industry to better plan its use of resources,” the draft order says.