$//Amendment of the Commission's Rules with Regard to the Establishment and Regulation of New Digital Audio Radio Services, F9517.wp5//$ $/2.106 Table of Frequency Allocations/$ For Record Only Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION FCC 95-17 Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Amendment of the Commission's ) Rules with Regard to the ) GEN Docket No. 90-357 Establishment and Regulation of ) New Digital Audio Radio Services ) REPORT AND ORDER Adopted: January 12, 1995 Released: January 18, 1995 By the Commission: Commissioners Quello, Barrett, Ness and Chong issuing separate statements. 1. By this action, the Commission allocates spectrum in the 2310-2360 MHz band for satellite digital audio radio services (DARS). This domestic allocation is in accordance with the international allocation made at the 1992 World Administrative Radio Conference (WARC-92). Our action today is the first step toward providing the American public with new multi-channel, multi-format digital radio services with sound quality equivalent to compact disks. These new services will be available by satellite to nationwide and regional audiences. Service and licensing rules for the new satellite DARS services will be addressed in a subsequent rule making. This proceeding has also addressed experimental technologies designed to implement digital broadcasting within the current AM and FM allocations. When the experimental results indicate the feasibility of implementing such systems, we will act expeditiously to consider any appropriate changes to our rules. BACKGROUND 2. On August 1, 1990, the Commission issued a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) soliciting information to be used in identifying spectrum and developing technical rules and regulatory policies for DARS in the United States. In the NOI, we noted international interest in the development of digital sound broadcasting and expressed concern that the United States would be disadvantaged if it did not participate in this new technology. In a parallel effort, by a series of inquiries between 1989 and 1991, the Commission solicited comment on appropriate U.S. positions to be taken at the World Administrative Radio Conference to be held in Spain in 1992, on possible spectrum to be used for the provision of digital audio programming by the broadcasting satellite service, or BSS ( Sound). Based on the inquiries, and in coordination with the National Telecommunications Information Administration (NTIA), the Commission supported a U.S. position seeking an allocation for satellite and complementary terrestrial DARS at 2310-2360 MHz. 3. At WARC-92, three different BSS (Sound) allocations were adopted. For the United States, International Radio Regulation RR750B allocated the 2310-2360 MHz band for digital audio satellite broadcasting. This allocation, like those adopted for other areas of the world, was limited to audio broadcasting by digital modulation. Resolution 528, also adopted at WARC-92, limits the introduction of BSS (Sound) systems to the upper 25 MHz of each of the allocated bands, pending action at a competent conference to be convened no later than 1998 to address planning of broadcast satellite services, development of procedures for coordinated use of complementary terrestrial broadcasting, and criteria for sharing with other services. 4. On November 6, 1992 the Commission released the Notice of Proposed Rule Making and Further Notice of Inquiry (NPRM), in which we proposed to adopt the WARC-92 allocation of 2310-2360 MHz for satellite DARS; proposed to accommodate aeronautical telemetry services now operating in the 2310-2390 MHz band at 2360-2390 MHz; and solicited comment on regulatory and technical aspects of satellite DARS. In the Further Notice of Inquiry, we recognized efforts to implement DARS within the existing radio broadcast spectrum. We stated that "existing broadcasters can and should have an opportunity to take advantage of new digital radio technologies," and requested comment on the latest developments in terrestrial DARS and "possible accommodation of both AM and FM broadcasters in a new system of digital broadcasting." In 1992, we also accepted for comment a license application from Satellite CD Radio, Inc. (SCDR) to operate a satellite DARS system and invited competing applications. Digital Satellite Broadcasting Company (DSBC), Primosphere Limited Partnership (Primosphere), and American Mobile Radio Corporation (AMRC) each submitted applications. As a result, there are currently four pending satellite DARS license applications. 5. Additionally, two industry committees are considering DARS technical standards issues. The Electronics Industry Association (EIA) has formed a subcommittee to consider the development of standards for terrestrial and satellite DARS. Also, the National Radio Systems Committee (NRSC) has agreed to examine terrestrial DARS systems which would operate in the AM or FM broadcast bands, and EIA and NRSC are cooperating in testing such DARS technologies. COMMENTS 6. Comments were received from a wide variety of parties both in support of and in opposition to the allocation. Proponents of the allocation, including potential DARS providers, equipment manufacturers, and potential users, state that there will be major benefits from satellite DARS. These parties argue generally that a satellite-delivered system will meet the needs of unserved and underserved markets as well as provide enhanced quality of reception and increased audio program diversity. Further, they point out that a satellite DARS system that would provide enhanced quality of reception for all listeners is currently feasible. In addition, they assert that the allocation would create economic opportunities in the United States for various segments of industry, especially manufacturers of DARS-related equipment. Finally, proponents argue that a satellite DARS will improve U.S. competitiveness in the world marketplace. 7. Opponents, primarily existing broadcast entities, either reject a satellite DARS allocation or recommend that an allocation not be adopted until terrestrial DARS allocation options have been fully explored. Many of these commenters argue that satellite systems will adversely impact present AM/FM radio services by driving local stations out of business. This, they contend, will cause a loss of local service, which a satellite service by its nature cannot replace. This effect, these opponents argue, contravenes the intent of the Communications Act of 1934 (the Act) that local needs be met by broadcast media. In addition, opponents argue that programming will become less, not more, diverse as a result of satellite DARS. National Public Radio and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (NPR/CPB) do not oppose a satellite DARS allocation, but recommend that the Commission allocate frequencies in the 1.4-1.5 GHz band in lieu of the proposed allocation. NPR/CPB believe that L-band frequencies have better sharing characteristics that those in the S-band. 8. Several proponents of a satellite DARS allocation, including Muzak, DBS Division (Muzak), WPFW, and Innovative Communications Technologies, Inc. (Innovative) assert that the allocation will create new business opportunities in the audio broadcast industry, especially for companies engaged in the design and manufacture of DARS-related systems. Similarly, All Pro Sports and Entertainment, Inc. (All Pro) contends that a satellite DARS allocation will expand sports and entertainment programming and create related jobs; and WHUR-FM, Howard University (WHUR), suggests that this new technology will create opportunities for job training and employment. Further, the Recreation Vehicle Industry Association (RVIA) believes that the new service will increase the utility of RVs and thus promote the RV industry. 9. Several parties suggest that a principal benefit of satellite DARS will be the provision of high quality audio service to markets that are presently unserved or underserved because of either geographic or social and economic considerations. For example, Muzak and DigiNet Communications, Inc. (DigiNet) argue that satellite DARS will allow more customers and more locations to receive enhanced audio service. Dolby Laboratories (Dolby) recommends that the Commission act immediately to promote nationwide satellite DARS. The Maine Farm Bureau Association (Maine) states that the allocation would significantly increase access to sources of information and entertainment. Similarly, the Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation (Wyoming) contends that satellite DARS would alleviate many of the reception problems caused by Wyoming's mountainous terrain and low population density. The Education Development Center (EDC), a non-profit institution founded for the purpose of educational improvement, maintains that satellite DARS will provide the capability to deliver educational audio programming to remote and rural areas of the country and extend educational opportunities outside of the classroom. 10. Further, several other groups point out that specific niche markets hitherto unserved or underserved for social and economic reasons may now be served by satellite DARS. For example, the Office of Communications of the United Church of Christ (UCC) believes that satellite DARS service can serve minority ethnic and cultural interests that might otherwise not receive programming directed to a narrow audience. Similarly, the National Asian American Telecommunications Association (NAATA) agrees that ethnic and niche groups will benefit by the introduction of a nationwide service offering high quality, diverse programming. 11. In addition, proponents generally agree that satellite DARS will lead to an increase in program diversity. All Pro argues that the potential demand for niche-oriented audio programming is analogous to the proliferation of cable television programming, which has grown because of increases in channel availability and increased market size. Not allocating spectrum to satellite DARS, All Pro asserts, would fail to promote diverse and equitable audio programming coverage for the entire U.S. population. WHUR and DigiNet believe that satellite DARS will widen programming possibilities for local radio regardless of geography. 12. In response to concerns about the impact of DARS on terrestrial broadcast service, several parties argue that satellite DARS will have minimum impact on those services. For example, DSBC maintains that satellite DARS will not hurt the financial status of terrestrial radio and states that terrestrial broadcasters will have an opportunity to participate in providing DARS. UCC contends that DARS would be able to serve minority ethnic needs without hurting traditional radio service and might spur digital terrestrial development as well. It also argues that protectionism should not be allowed to block DARS implementation; rather, the decision to utilize DARS should be left to the consumer. 13. Proponents of the satellite DARS allocation further contend that the new service will promote technological development and help the competitive position of the United States. For example, WavePhore, Inc. (WavePhore), an equipment manufacturer, maintains that satisfying consumer demand for high quality broadcast audio will benefit high technology manufacturers and further the development of new technologies. On Call Communications, Inc. (OCC) states that DARS will aid the continued growth of technological developments in satellite communications and audio compression. Similarly, DigiNet states that permitting the allocation will lead to applications in other areas of digital communications and to advances in areas such as compression and satellite transmission. Further, Innovative argues that the growth of digital information transmission would enhance the capabilities and utility of the frequency spectrum and extend digital media into many aspects of everyday life. In addition, Digital Evolutions, Limited (Digital) suggests that the ability to send high data rate audio programming to mobile locations over satellite DARS systems has several potential benefits, including the incorporation of DARS into Intelligent Vehicle and Highway Systems (IVHS). Digital suggests that IVHS/DARS could be used to transmit traffic, weather, and emergency advisories directly to vehicles, and that the ability to receive this information even in locations far from metropolitan areas would increase the effectiveness of such advisories by increasing listeners' planning time and by widening their range of alternative routing possibilities. 14. Loral Aerospace Holdings, Inc. (Loral) states that the expeditious allocation and licensing of satellite DARS is necessary in order to maintain the U.S. lead in technology over other countries, which are currently developing a system in the L-band. Primosphere agrees that rapid implementation of satellite DARS will increase the ability of American industry to compete in international markets. Primosphere suggests that the Commission establish a timetable for moving current aeronautical telemetry users of the band to other frequencies so that satellite DARS can be implemented by 1997. 15. Parties favoring a satellite DARS allocation generally support allocating the 2310-2360 MHz band proposed in the NPRM and generally support immediate use of the entire band. Loral argues that the 2310-2360 MHz band is sufficient and appropriate for satellite DARS. DSBC and SCDR contend that the entire 50 MHz should be made available domestically for immediate use despite the fact that WARC-92 Resolution 528 limited the introduction of service to the upper 25 MHz of the band until a conference is held to plan the BSS (Sound) service. SCDR asserts that the limitation on use imposed by WARC-92 served two purposes: to provide an orderly transition for terrestrial services displaced from the band and to ensure that BSS (Sound) orbital slots and frequencies remain available for less developed countries. SCDR and DSBC conclude that neither of the purposes of the policy is served by its application in the United States and that Resolution 528 should therefore not be binding on the Commission. Immediate action on the full domestic spectrum allocation for satellite DARS is necessary, according to DSBC, to assure continued U.S. lead in high technology radio services. Primosphere and AMRC also urge the Commission to allocate the entire 50 MHz at 2310-2360 MHz. 16. Because mobile use of the 2310-2390 MHz band is currently limited to aeronautical telemetering and associated telecommand operations for flight testing, the national aerospace manufacturers are especially concerned with the choice of band for any new service. The Aerospace and Flight Test Radio Coordinating Council (AFTRCC), an association of the nation's principal aerospace manufacturers, agrees that allocating the 2310- 2360 MHz band for satellite DARS is feasible. AFTRCC's states that it prefers an allocation of the 2310-2360 MHz band to an allocation of the 1435-1530 MHz band, which had been considered as an early option for a satellite DARS allocation. Although both of these bands are currently allocated to aeronautical telemetry, AFTRCC favors use of the 2310-2360 MHz band as the least intrusive to the needs of the aerospace testing community. 17. Opponents of the satellite DARS spectrum allocation argue that the new service would bring about the demise of local radio service by forcing current AM/FM stations out of business. They argue that these stations are unlikely to survive the competition of a nationwide satellite-delivered service. For example, Shamrock Broadcasting, Inc. et al. (Shamrock) argues that the radio marketplace is already highly competitive, and a variety of specialized audio channels is available to cable television subscribers at a cost approximating that projected by potential satellite DARS providers. Shamrock contends that the increased competition represented by satellite DARS will jeopardize local radio and the public service that it provides. Mount Wilson FM Broadcasters (Mount Wilson) states that many new FM stations have already been added, and that given this extremely competitive market, FM stations would not be in a position to compete with a nationwide commercial service such as DARS. Further, KSBJ contends that the large budgets of satellite companies would permit them to provide programming that would draw away local listeners, thus fragmenting local audiences to the point where small stations could no longer survive. 18. Opponents also argue that satellite DARS will not be able to replace existing broadcast outlets with adequate service. The Alabama Broadcasters Association (ABA) contends that the current rules on localism -- the main studio rule, political and cablecasting law, and broadcast renewal expectancies, for example -- are geared toward promoting strong community radio stations. Shamrock similarly argues that local radio stations will suffer fatally from the competition posed by a new satellite service. Shamrock also notes that such a service, which will reach 261 markets throughout the entire country, unduly concentrates control of radio service, in contravention of the Commission's recent efforts to limit the number of stations that can be controlled by one entity. BSB Communications (BSB) contends that the governmental interest in supporting local service is demonstrated again in the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, which supports the maintenance of free local commercial television. Satellite DARS, on the other hand, would create a national monopoly of superstations not tied to any community. 19. Several opponents of allocating spectrum in the 2310-2360 band for satellite DARS argue that the Commission should focus its efforts on improving existing radio service by introducing terrestrial DARS. NAB, for example, maintains that the best option for implementing digital broadcasting is by allowing terrestrial DARS on current broadcast channels. NAB states that broadcasters have been in the forefront of DARS developments and have worked consistently to develop a plan to bring the significant improvements of DARS to their listening audience. NAB argues that allocation and authorization of satellite DARS will hinder and threaten the successful implementation of terrestrial DARS and will present a potential danger to free local radio service. Noble Broadcast Group, Inc. (Noble) contends that the introduction of DARS to the existing framework of commercial and non- commercial broadcast stations holds great promise for improving the long-term commercial viability of the AM and FM services. Therefore, Noble urges the Commission to delay the authorization of satellite DARS until terrestrial DARS is well advanced. Noble further argues that the early introduction of terrestrial DARS, based on the existing framework of more that 11,000 aural broadcast stations, is more likely to afford a stimulus to the nation's electronics industry than satellite DARS. 20. On September 7, 1994, SCDR submitted an ex parte filing entitled "Satellite Radio" containing an economic analysis of the predicted impact of satellite DARS on traditional radio service. On December 27, 1994 the NAB filed a response entitled "The Truth About Satellite Radio." In its filing, SCDR makes a number of points which it believes suggest that DARS will pose no threat to local radio service. According to SCDR, satellite radio will be supported by subscription and/or by national advertising, whereas local radio is supported by local advertising and thus satellite radio should have little or no impact on local station advertising revenues. SCDR draws analogies between satellite radio's predicted small impact on terrestrial radio and the small impact of other services on potential competitors such as the lack of impact by automobile cassette and CD players on auto radio listenership, and the small impact of cable, especially pay cable, on over-the-air television broadcasting. SCDR also predicts that satellite radio will only penetrate 3-10% of the auto radio market within 10 years. Hence, SCDR suggests that satellite radio will have minimal impact on terrestrial radio service revenues. According to SCDR, the radio industry is currently doing quite well, measured by growth of advertising revenues, share of advertising, cash flow multiples, revenue per station and the rising sales price of stations. Thus, SCDR believes that the Commission should not be concerned about any possible adverse impact on terrestrial radio service. 21. In contrast, NAB claims that satellite radio could have a devastating impact on community service and will largely duplicate the programming and formats of local radio stations. NAB argues that the impact of satellite radio on conventional radio is not analogous to that of cassette tapes or the impact of cable on over-the-air television. According to NAB, in 1992 60% of radio stations were losing money. From 1987 to 1993 real revenue per station declined for small market stations. While SCDR suggests that most of the audience for satellite radio will be people in automobiles, NAB believes that audiences at fixed locations might also listen to satellite radio so that its impact on terrestrial radio audiences will be larger than that suggested by SCDR. NAB predicts that satellite radio will lead to larger audience loss, larger revenue loss and a larger cash flow loss for terrestrial stations than SCDR predicts. Hence, NAB concludes that satellite radio will surely harm terrestrial service. DECISION 22. We conclude that the record supports a spectrum allocation for satellite DARS and that the allocation is in the public interest. Satellite DARS will provide continuous radio service of compact disk quality for all listeners and will offer an increased choice of over-the- air audio programming. Further, a satellite delivery system for DARS will make it possible to serve segments in the United States which are currently underserved and unserved. As suggested by some proponents, a satellite DARS system has the potential to provide new services to rural listeners, minority and ethnic groups, and audiences whose first language is not English. In addition, this new service will provide opportunities for domestic economic development and improve U.S. competitiveness in the world marketplace. Finally, based upon the record before us, we are unable to conclude at this time that the introduction of satellite DARS will have a significant adverse impact on existing radio services. The size of the impact on terrestrial radio will depend on many factors, including the specific number and types of services that a future satellite DARS might offer, the cost of the service to the public, and the future development of terrestrial DARS. While we believe that it is possible that competition from a new regional or national satellite radio service might diminish the financial ability of some terrestrial stations to provide local service, we are not now prepared to deny the allocation of spectrum for future satellite DARS and the benefits that may accrue from the provision of such service to the public, on the basis of potential for economic harm to some stations. 23. We have previously addressed the legal issue of the impact of satellite services on the localism component of Section 307(b) in the context of Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), and our analysis of the issue was affirmed by the court in National Association of Broadcasters v. FCC, 740 F.2d 1190 (1984). Section 307(b) of the Communications Act requires a dispersal of radio services among the several states and communities so as "to provide a fair, efficient, and equitable distribution of radio service to each of the same." We find that a nationwide or regional system such as satellite DARS, which serves even the most remote communities, is a furtherance of the Commission's commitment to an equitable distribution as set forth in Section 307(b). The court's reasoning in NAB v. FCC with respect to the issues of local as opposed to national or regional broadcasting is apposite here. The court reasoned that the framers of the Act could not have foreseen the technological developments represented by satellite services, yet it would be anomalous to read the Act so as to prevent the FCC from authorizing an innovative technology that would confer benefits on all Americans. The court therefore held that "not every communications service approved by the Commission need be tied to a local community."[original emphasis] Further, the court indicated that the Act does not bestow an exclusive right on any service: "existing systems, like existing licensees, have no entitlement that permits them to deflect competitive pressure from innovative and effective technology." We continue to find that a nationwide service such as that being proposed in satellite DARS is in fact capable of furthering the Congressional intent to distribute radio services widely and thus supplement, rather than supplant, local broadcast stations, and we reject the suggestion that we must protect one service at the expense of an entirely new technology. Accordingly, we conclude that commenters' concerns with respect to attenuation of local service do not obviate our approval of the spectrum allocation for satellite DARS. 24. As to the studies submitted by SCDR and NAB, we are not entirely persuaded by either submission. Neither commenter fully discloses the data used nor explains the assumptions, models or methodology used to make their predictions or projections. It may be that SCDR understates the possible impact on terrestrial radio and that NAB overstates it. However, a number of factors which we feel may be relevant in making such predictions about the economic impact of satellite DARS were not analyzed or discussed by either SCDR or NAB. For example, the size of the listening audience for satellite DARS and its potential for diverting listeners from terrestrial stations and corresponding impact on station audience, revenues and ultimately cash flow and profits will depend upon many factors which are unknown. Among the unknown factors are the number and types of programs that might be offered on a satellite service; the quality of the sound provided compared to that available from terrestrial service; the degree to which satellite services might be subscription based or advertiser supported, and if subscription supported, the price of the subscription fee; and the extent to which, at the time a satellite DARS might begin operating, a terrestrial DARS might also be in existence. Without this type of information, it is impossible to conclude with any degree of confidence that satellite DARS will have an impact on traditional radio stations that would be contrary to the public interest. 25. We are prepared to adopt an allocation for this new service at this time because we believe that it will benefit consumers and is in the public interest. At the same time, however, we note that when we consider service regulations to govern the obligations under which satellite DARS applicants would be permitted to operate, we intend to request information on and consider all relevant and available information which addresses the impact of satellite DARS on traditional service. 26. Regarding the band to be allocated, we believe that the proposed 2310-2360 MHz spectrum is appropriate. Commenters strongly favor this band over, for example, the 1.5 GHz band. Of particular importance is the aeronautical telemetry community's support for reaccommodating existing aeronautical telemetry users at 2310-2390 MHz in the 2360-2390 MHz band. In addition, this band was allocated for BSS (Sound) at WARC-92, and our allocation therefore conforms to the action of that international body. 27. Further, while we are aware that Resolution 528, adopted at WARC-92, limits the use of the allocation to the upper 25 MHz pending an international BSS (Sound) planning conference to be held in 1996, we conclude that the reasons for the limitation on use of the band imposed by WARC-92 do not obtain in the present circumstance. That is, the limitation on use of the allocation imposed by WARC-92 served two purposes: to provide an orderly transition for terrestrial services displaced from the band and to ensure that BSS (Sound) orbital slots and frequencies remain available for less developed countries. We agree with SCDR and DSBC that neither of the purposes of the policy is served by its application in the United States. We also note that satellite DARS systems will not be operative before 1998, and we therefore believe that such systems can take into account any sharing or planning conditions that may be imposed at a subsequent conference, if necessary. Accordingly, we believe that no purpose would be served in imposing a limit on the use of the DARS allocation at this time. 28. In addition, we continue to support efforts to implement terrestrial DARS technology. We believe that existing radio broadcasters can and should have the opportunity to profit from new digital radio technologies, and we anticipate that technical advances will soon permit both AM and FM broadcasters to offer improved digital sound. As noted above, the EIA Digital Audio Radio Subcommittee is evaluating the technical characteristics of a variety of experimental DARS transmission systems, with NRSC cooperation on terrestrial systems. Some of the systems being tested are designed specifically to permit digital broadcasting within the existing AM and FM bands. We fully support these developments, and we see great promise in these innovations for providing improved services to consumers. These innovations will also help promote the future viability of our terrestrial broadcasting system, which provides local news and public affairs programming. When the test results indicate the feasibility of implementing such systems, we will act expeditiously to consider any appropriate changes to our rules. ADMINISTRATIVE Final Regulatory Analysis 29. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C.  603, an initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis was incorporated in the Notice in ET Docket No. 90-357. Written comments on the proposals in the Notice, including the Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, were requested. 30. Need for and Objective of Rules. Our objective is to provide a spectrum allocation for the introduction of satellite digital audio radio services. We expect that satellite DARS will benefit the public by providing higher quality, more interference resistant digital audio and ancillary services to the American public. 31. Issues Raised by the Public in Response to the Initial Analysis. Several parties offered comments to the proposals set forth in the Notice, but these did not address the initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. 32. Any Significant Alternative Minimizing Impact on Small Entities and Consistent with Stated Objectives. The alternative to allocating these bands to satellite DARS is not to allocate spectrum for this service or to accommodate it in other spectrum. We conclude that the bands proposed in the NPRM are the most desirable for satellite DARS. Further, existing aeronautical telemetry users of the band support the proposal. ORDERING CLAUSE 33. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Part 2 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations IS AMENDED as specified in Appendix A, effective 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. This action is taken pursuant to sections 4(i), 303(c), (f), (g), and (r), and 309(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. sections 154(i), 303(c), (f), (g), and (r). FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William F. Caton Acting Secretary APPENDIX RULE CHANGES I. Part 2 of Chapter I of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: PART 2 - - FREQUENCY ALLOCATIONS AND RADIO TREATY MATTERS: GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS 1. The authority citations in Part 2 continues to read: AUTHORITY: Sec. 4, 302, 303, and 307 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154, 154(i), 302, 303, 303(r), and 307, unless otherwise noted. 2. Section 2.106, the Table of Frequency Allocations is amended as follows: a. The entry for 2300-2450 MHz is removed and new entries for 2300-2450 MHz are added in numerical order. b. INTERNATIONAL FOOTNOTES Nos. 750B, 751A, AND 751B are added; No.743A is deleted; and 751 is modified. c. UNITED STATES (US) FOOTNOTES Nos. US327 AND US328 are added.  2.106 Table of Frequency Allocations. International Table United States Table FCC Use Designators Government Non-Government Region 1 Allocation MHz (1) Region 2 Allocation MHz (2) Region 3 Allocation MHz (3) Allocation MHz (4) Allocation MHz (5) Rule Part (s) (6) Special Use Frequencies (7) 2300-2450 FIXED MOBILE Amateur Radiolocation 664 751A 752 2300-2450 FIXED MOBILE RADIOLOCATION Amateur 664 750B 751 751B 752 2300-2310 RADIOLOCATION Fixed Mobile US253 G2 2300-2310 Amateur US253 Amateur (97) 2310-2360 Mobile Radiolocation Fixed US276 US327 US328 G2 751B G120 2310-2360 BROADCASTING- SATELLITE Mobile US276 US327 US328 751B Digital Audio Radio Services 2360-2390 MOBILE RADIOLOCATION Fixed US276 G2 G120 2360-2390 MOBILE US276 2390-2450 RADIOLOCATION 664 752 G2 2390-2450 Amateur 664 752 Amateur (97) INTERNATIONAL FOOTNOTES * * * * * 743A delete footnote 750B Additional allocation: in the United States of America and India, the band 2310-2360 MHz is also allocated to the broadcasting-satellite service (sound) and complementary terrestrial broadcasting service on a primary basis. Such use is limited to digital audio broadcasting and is subject to the provisions of Resolution 528. 751A In France, the use of the band 2310-2360 MHz by the aeronautical mobile service for telemetry has priority over other uses by the mobile service. 751B Space stations of the broadcasting-satellite service in the band 2310-2360 MHz operating in accordance with No. 750B that may affect services to which this band is allocated in other countries shall be coordinated and notified in accordance with Resolution 33. Complementary terrestrial broadcasting stations shall be subject to bilateral coordination with neighboring countries prior to their bringing into use. * * * * * UNITED STATES (US) FOOTNOTES * * * * * US327 The band 2310-2360 MHz is allocated to the broadcasting-satellite service (sound) and complementary terrestrial broadcasting service on a primary basis. Such use is limited to digital audio broadcasting and is subject to the provisions of Resolution 528. US328 In the band 2310-2360 MHz, the mobile and radiolocation services are allocated on a primary basis until 1 January 1997 or until a broadcasting-satellite (sound) service has been brought into use in such a manner as to affect or be affected by the mobile and radiolocation services in those service areas, whichever is later. The broadcasting-satellite (sound) service during implementation should also take cognizance of the expendable and reusable launch vehicle frequencies 2312.5, 2332.5, and 2352.5 MHz, to minimize the impact on this mobile service use to the extent possible. * * * * *