Skip Navigation

Federal Communications Commission

English Display Options

Commission Document

700 MHz Public Safety Broadband Service Rules Report and Order

Attachments & Related Documents

Download Options

Released: October 28, 2013

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

Before the

Federal Communications Commission

Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of
)
)
Implementing Public Safety Broadband Provisions )
PS Docket No. 12-94
of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation
)
Act of 2012
)
)
Implementing a Nationwide, Broadband,
)
PS Docket No. 06-229
Interoperable Public Safety Network in the 700
)
MHz Band
)
)
Service Rules for the 698-746, 747-762 and 777-
)
WT Docket No. 06-150
792 MHz Bands
)

SECOND REPORT AND ORDER

Adopted: October 28, 2013

Released: October 28, 2013

By the Commission: Acting Chairwoman Clyburn and Commissioners Rosenworcel and Pai issuing
separate statements.

I.

INTRODUCTION

1.
In this Second Report and Order 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.1 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 this Second Report and Order will further “facilitate the transition”
of spectrum to FirstNet to enable its deployment of a nationwide public safety broadband network as
prescribed by statute.2 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.3

1 This consolidation of technical service rules was proposed in a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Notice) that also
sought comment on whether the Commission need adopt reporting obligations or rural construction milestones in
connection with its statutory duties regarding FirstNet. See Implementing Public Safety Broadband Provisions of
the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 et al., PS Docket 12-94 et al., Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking
, 28 FCC Rcd 2715, 2728-29 ¶¶ 42-46 (2013). In addition, the Notice sought comment on transition
plans for incumbent operations in FirstNet’s licensed spectrum, which primarily consist of narrowband public safety
systems that were authorized to operate in this spectrum prior to the reconfiguration of the 700 MHz public safety
spectrum in 2007. See id. at 2729-2733 ¶¶ 47-59. All matters raised in the Notice but not addressed herein are
deferred for future consideration.
2 See 47 U.S.C. § 1421(c).
3 Comments of the First Responder Network Authority, PS Docket 12-94 at 3 (Aug. 2, 2013).

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

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 this Second Report and Order 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.4 The
Act established FirstNet as an independent authority within the National Telecommunications and
Information Administration (NTIA),5 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.6 The Act charges FirstNet with the responsibility for
establishing and overseeing “a nationwide, interoperable public safety broadband network”7 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 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].”8 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.9
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.”10 On May 22, 2012,
the Interoperability Board submitted its recommendations to the Commission, and on June 21, 2012, the

4 See Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, Pub. L. No. 112-96, 126 Stat. 156 §§ 6001-6303, 6413
(codified at 47 U.S.C. §§ 1401-1443, 1457)
5 On August 20, 2012, the Department of Commerce announced the initial appointment of non-Federal members to
the Board of Directors of FirstNet. See Acting U.S. Commerce Secretary Rebecca Blank Announces Board of
Directors for the First Responder Network Authority, Press Release (Aug. 20, 2012) available at
http://www.commerce.gov/news/press-releases/2012/08/20/acting-us-commerce-secretary-rebecca-blank-
announces-board-directors- (last visited Oct. 25, 2013)
6 See id. §§ 1411(a), 1421(a), 1424(a). FirstNet’s license also includes the 768-769/798-799 MHz band, which the
Commission has designated as a “guard band” that spectrally separates the broadband and narrowband segments of
the 700 MHz public safety band. See infra Section III.A.1.f.
7 Id. § 1422(a). See generally id. § 1426 (setting out FirstNet’s powers, duties and responsibilities).
8 Id. § 1426(b).
9 Id. § 1426.
10 Id. § 1423(a).
2

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

Commission approved the transmittal of these recommendations to FirstNet.11 The Act requires FirstNet
to incorporate the recommendations into its RFPs “without materially changing” them.12
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,13 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.14 On November 15, 2012,15 the Bureau granted FirstNet the license prescribed by statute, under
call sign WQQE234.16
6.
The Commission released the Notice on March 8, 2013, seeking comment on additional
measures to implement its statutory responsibilities regarding deployment of the public safety broadband
network.17 The Notice 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.18 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.”19
7.
FirstNet filed comments on the Notice 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].”20 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.21 On August 28, the Public Safety and
Homeland Security Bureau published a notice in the Federal Register providing an additional seven days

11 See Recommendations of the Technical Advisory Board for First Responder Interoperability, PS Docket No. 12-
74, Order of Transmittal, FCC 12-68 (June 21, 2012). The Interoperability Board terminated fifteen days after this
transmittal, i.e., on July 6, 2012. See 47 U.S.C. § 1423(f).
12 Id. § 1426(b)(1)(B). The Act also requires States electing to “opt out” and deploy their own State network to
submit to the Commission for approval construction plans that comply with the recommendations. See id. §
1442(e)(3)(C)(i)(I).
13 Id. at Section III.A.
14 Id. at Section III.B.1.
15 See Letter from Samuel Ginn, Chairman of the Board, First Responder Network Authority, to David S. Turetsky,
Chief, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (dated Sept. 25, 2012).
16 See Universal Licensing System, License Call Sign WQQE234 (Nov. 15, 2012).
17 See Notice.
18 See id. at 2720 ¶ 16.
19 See id. (citing 47 U.S.C. § 1426(c)(1)(B)).
20 First Net Comments at 4. FirstNet did provide substantive comment on the disposition of the 700 MHz public
safety guard band. See id. at 3; see also Notice, 28 FCC Rcd at 2725 ¶¶ 31-32.
21 Id. at 3.
3

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

for public comment on FirstNet’s filing.22 The few comments received in response were supportive of
these views.23

III.

SECOND REPORT AND ORDER

8.
In this Second Report and Order, 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.24
9.
In the Notice 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.25 The few
commenters that addressed the potential costs associated with consolidating technical service rules under
Part 90 anticipate that such costs will be minimal.26 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 Notice, 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.”27 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

22 See 78 Fed. Reg. 53124 (Aug. 28, 2013). For purposes of citation, comments filed during the initial comment
cycle are referred to as “Comments” or “Reply Comments” while those filed during the subsequent filing period are
referred to as “Comments on FirstNet Filing”.
23 See generally Comments of APCO on FirstNet Filing, PS Docket 12-94 (Sept. 4, 2013); Comments of AT&T
Services (AT&T) on FirstNet Filing, PS Docket 12-94 (Sept. 4, 2013); Comments of FiberTower on FirstNet Filing,
PS Docket 12-94 (Sept. 4, 2013); Comments of the National Public Safety Telecommunications Council (NPSTC)
on FirstNet Filing, PS Docket 12-94 (Sept. 4, 2013); Comments of Motorola Solutions on FirstNet Filing, PS
Docket 12-94 (Sept. 4, 2013); Verizon Ex Parte Filing, PS Docket 12-94 (Sept. 4, 2013) (commenting on FirstNet
filing).
24 See FirstNet Comments at 3; see also Comments of APCO, PS Docket 12-94 at 4 (May 24, 2013); Comments of
Ericsson, PS Docket 12-94 at 6 (May 24, 2013); Comments of Harris Corp. (Harris), PS Docket 12-94 at 8 (May 24,
2013); Comments of Motorola Solutions, PS Docket 12-94 at 10-11 (May 24, 2013); Comments of TIA, PS Docket
12-94 at 5 (May 24, 2013); Reply Comments of City of Charlotte, North Carolina (Charlotte), PS Docket 12-94 at 2-
3 (June 10, 2013); Reply Comments of Nokia Siemens, PS Docket 12-94 at 3 (June 11, 2013); Sonim Technologies,
Ex Parte Filing, PS Docket 12-94 (July 11, 2013); AT&T Comments on FirstNet Filing at 1-3; NPSTC Comments
on FirstNet Filing at 4; see also National Telecommunications and Information Administration, FirstNet Approves
Resolutions on Spectrum Lease Agreement with LA-RICS and Personnel Acquisition Strategy,
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/press-release/2013/firstnet-approves-resolutions-spectrum-lease-agreement-la-rics-and-
personnel-acqu (last visited Oct. 25, 2013); National Telecommunications and Information Administration, FirstNet
Approves Spectrum Lease Agreement with New Mexico; Provides Status Update on Remaining Projects,
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/press-release/2013/firstnet-approves-spectrum-lease-agreement-new-mexico-provides-
status-update-rema (last visited Oct. 25, 2013).
25 See Notice, 28 FCC Rcd at 2720 ¶ 15.
26 See Ericsson Comments at 2-3; General Dynamics C4 Systems (General Dynamics) Comments at 6-7, 9.
27 Notice, 28 FCC Rcd at 2721 ¶ 17.
4

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

many other commenters expressed support for this general approach, and none opposed it.28 Accordingly,
in this Second Report and Order 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 Notice, the Commission proposed to modify Section 90.542(a) of its
rules to bring the D Block frequencies within its purview and to delete as redundant the parallel
provisions of Section 27.50(b).29 The Commission also sought comment on whether the power limits
established in Section 90.542(a) remain appropriate for the combined public safety broadband allocation,
and on the relative costs and benefits of any proposed alternatives.30 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.31
13.
Comments. Most commenters that addressed the issue support maintaining the power and
antenna height limits set forth in Section 90.542(a) and extending the reach of this provision to the D
Block.32 Harris supports this general approach, but argues that the rule’s reduced base station power limits
for antennas above 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.”33 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.34 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.”35 Verizon further argues that more restrictive power limits on transmissions from antennas above

28 See FirstNet Comments at 2-3; see also Alcatel-Lucent Comments at 2; APCO Comments at 3; AT&T Comments
at 4; Ericsson Comments at 2; General Dynamics Comments at 3; Harris Comments at 1; Motorola Solutions
Comments at 4; Comments of NPSTC, PS Docket 12-94 at 3 (May 24, 2013); TIA Comments at 3; Charlotte Reply
Comments at 2; Joint Reply Comments of the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA) and
NTCA-The Rural Broadband Association (NTCA), PS Docket 12-94 at 5-6 (June 10, 2013); Nokia Siemens Reply
Comments at 3; Reply Comments of Oceus Networks, PS Docket 12-94 at 3 (June 10, 2013); Reply Comments of
Verizon and Verizon Wireless (Verizon), PS Docket 12-94 at 1-2 (June 10, 2013).
29 Notice, 28 FCC Rcd at 2721 ¶ 19.
30 Id. at 2721-22 ¶ 19.
31 Id. at 2722 ¶ 20.
32 See Alcatel-Lucent Comments at 2; AT&T Comments at 4; Ericsson Comments at 3-4; General Dynamics
Comments at 3; Motorola Solutions Comments at 5; TIA Comments at 4; Oceus Reply Comments at 3-4.
33 Harris Comments at 15.
34 Id.
35 Reply Comments of Verizon and Verizon Wireless (Verizon), PS Docket 12-94 at 2-3 (June 10, 2013).
5

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

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.”36
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 Section 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.37 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.”38 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.”39
15.
Discussion. As the Commission observed in the Notice, 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 Section 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.40 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,41 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 Section 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 Notice, the Commission proposed
consolidating under Section 90.542(b) of its rules the power flux density limits that govern the respective
segments of FirstNet’s licensed spectrum.42 The Commission then sought comment on whether the limit
set forth, namely 3000 microwatts per square meter (µw/m2) on the ground within 1000 meters of the
base of an antenna for any signal transmitted in excess of 1000 watts ERP, remains appropriate.43 Finally,

36 Id. at 3.
37 Motorola Solutions Comments at 5; see also Ericsson Comments at 3; Harris Comments at 15.
38 Motorola Solutions Comment at 5-6.
39 General Dynamics Comments at 4.
40 See AT&T Comments at 4.
41 See 47 C.F.R. §§ 90.542(a)(2), (4), (5), 90.542(b).
42 See Notice, 28 FCC Rcd at 2722 ¶ 21.
43 Id.
6

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

it sought comment on the costs and benefits of the proposed rule consolidation and of any possible
alternatives.44
17.
Comments. Several commenters support the proposed consolidation of existing power
flux density limits under Section 90.542(b).45 One such commenter, Motorola Solutions, explains that
“[i]n the 800 MHz band, the 3000 µw/m2 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.”46 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.”47 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.48 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.”49 Accordingly, Harris recommends extending rule to cover base station
transmissions at any level of ERP.50
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.51 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 Notice the Commission sought comment on proposals to unify under Section
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 Section 90.543(e) the provisions restricting emissions from the public safety broadband allocation
into the adjacent 700 MHz public safety narrowband segment (769-775/799-805 MHz).52 It then
proposed consolidating into Section 90.543(f) the limits on emissions from the public safety broadband

44 Id.
45 See Alcatel-Lucent Comments at 2; AT&T Comments at 4; Motorola Solutions Comments at 6; TIA Comments at
4.
46 Motorola Solutions Comments at 6.
47 Harris Comments at 17-18.
48 Id. at 18.
49 Id.
50 Id. at 17-18.
51 See 47 U.S.C. § 1426(b)(1) (requiring FirstNet to consult with, inter alia, “State, tribal and local public safety
entities” in establishing the network); id. at 1426(c)(2)(A) (requiring FirstNet to consult with such entities on
specific matters including FirstNet’s “radio access network build out” and “placement of towers”).
52 Notice, 28 FCC Rcd at 2722-23 ¶ 23.
7

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

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 Section 90.543(f) that the rule applies to
emissions “including harmonics.”53 Finally, it sought comment on whether limits codified in Section
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.54 For each of
these proposals, the Commission also sought comment on any possible alternatives and on the respective
costs and benefits of each.55
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 Notice.56
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.”57 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.”58 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.”59 Harris believes that the proposed limit on emissions into the narrowband spectrum
would not adequately protect these existing systems from interference from LTE operations.60
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.61
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,”62 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.”63 While commenters generally support the proposed consolidation under
Section 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.”64 Ericsson, on the other hand, contends that the provision in

53 Id. at 2723 ¶ 24.
54 Id. at ¶ 25.
55 See id. at 2722-23 ¶¶ 23-25.
56 See Alcatel-Lucent Comments at 2; AT&T Comments at 5; Ericsson Comments at 4; General Dynamics
Comments at 6; Motorola Solutions Comments at 7; TIA Comments at 4-5
57 Motorola Solutions Comments at 7.
58 AT&T Comments at 5.
59 See Harris Comments at 19.
60 See id. at 20.
61 See Harris Comments at 20-21; see also id. at app. A.
62 General Dynamics Comments at 5.
63 Motorola Solutions Comments at 7.
8

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

question would apply to harmonics emissions even in the absence of explicit wording to that effect,
making such wording “not necessary.”65
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.66 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.67 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.”68
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.69
24.
Discussion. Out-of-band emissions limits play a critical role in minimizing inter-band
interference. As several commenters recognize, the limits established under Section 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 Section 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.70 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.71
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
(Continued from previous page)
64 General Dynamics Comments at 6; see also Motorola Solutions Comments at 7.
65 Ericsson Comments at 4.
66 See Comments of Access Spectrum, PS Docket 12-94 at 4 (May 24, 2013); AT&T Comments at 5; General
Dynamics Comments at 6-7; TIA Comments at 4.
67 General Dynamics Comments at 6.
68 Id. at 7.
69 See AT&T Comments at 5; see also TIA Comments at 4.
70 As previously observed, the statute imposes obligations on FirstNet to consult with state and local governments in
deploying its network. See 47 U.S.C. § 1426(b)(1), (c)(2)(A).
71 See id.
9

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

operations. Moreover, the one commenter to address the cost implications of the proposal argues that it
would create no cost burden.72 We accordingly adopt the proposal.
c.

Field Strength Limits

27.
In the Notice, 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.73 The
Commission then sought comment more specifically on whether to adopt for this band the field strength
limit of 40 dBuV/M specified in Section 27.55(a)(2) for 700 MHz commercial wireless spectrum, or
whether an alternative limit would be more appropriate.74 The Commission also sought comment on the
costs and benefits of the various options.75
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.]”76 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.”77 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 Section 27.55(a)(2).78 General Dynamics and TIA also support using the 40 dBuV/M limit set forth in
Section 27.55(a)(2).79
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.”80 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.”81 Alcatel-Lucent also opposes adoption of such a limit
“at this time.”82
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

72 See General Dynamics Comments at 6.
73 Notice, 28 FCC Rcd at 2723-24 ¶ 26.
74 Id.
75 Id. at 2724 ¶ 26.
76 Motorola Solutions Comments at 8.
77 Id.
78 AT&T Comments at 5.
79 General Dynamics Comments at 7; TIA Comments at 5.
80 Harris Comments at 21-22.
81 Ericsson Comments at 4.
82 Alcatel-Lucent Comments at 2.
10

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

interoperability plan for the Commission’s approval;83 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;84
and pay any user fees associated with its use of FirstNet’s core network.85 These provisions, among
others,86 already contemplate a significant amount of advance coordination of State Network operations
with those of FirstNet.87 We therefore do not find it necessary at this time to adopt a field strength limit
for RANs operated in FirstNet’s licensed spectrum.88
d.

Interference Coordination

31.
The Commission sought comment in the Notice 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.”89 Motorola Solutions
raises similar concerns and suggests that interference coordination procedures be “implemented as a
design guideline” rather than a binding rule.90 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.91 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 Section 27.64.92
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.93 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.”94

83 See 47 U.S.C. § 1442(e)(3)(C)(i).
84 Id. § 1442(e)(3)(D).
85 Id. § 1442(f).
86 See 47 U.S.C. §§ 1426(b)(1), 1426(c)(2)(A).
87 At any rate, as Motorola Solutions observes, the adoption of field strength limits would not eliminate the need for
further coordination of FirstNet and State network operations. See Motorola Solutions Comments at 8.
88 Our declining to adopt such a limit in this Second Report and Order does not prejudge our consideration of
whether field strength at the RAN service boundary may factor into determining whether a planned State Network
demonstrates “interoperability with the nationwide public safety broadband network.” See 47 U.S.C. §
1442(e)(3)(C)(i)(II).
89 APCO Comments at 3.
90 Motorola Solutions Comments at 8-9.
91 Ericsson Comments at 5.
92 AT&T Comments at 6; see also 47 C.F.R. § 27.64.
93 Virginia Comments at 3.
94 Id.
11

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

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.95 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,96 and we
encourage all parties to work together to minimize the potential for interference.
e.

International Considerations

35.
In the Notice, the Commission proposed to remove the D Block from the reach of Section
27.57(b) and place it within the purview of Section 90.533, which sets forth substantively identical
requirements concerning international coordination.97 Ericsson and General Dynamics, the only parties to
address the issue, support this proposed rule consolidation.98 Accordingly, we adopt the proposal.
f.
700 MHz Public Safety Guard Band
36.
In the Notice, 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.99
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.100 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.101
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 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.”102 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.”103 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

95 See 47 U.S.C. § 1426(b)(1), (c)(2)(A).
96 See 47 U.S.C. §§ 301 et seq., 1403, 1421.
97 Notice, 28 FCC Rcd at 2724 ¶ 29.
98 Ericsson Comments at 5; General Dynamics Comments at 7.
99 Notice, 28 FCC Rcd 2725 ¶ 31.
100 Id.; see also 47 C.F.R. § 90.531(f)
101 Id. ¶ 32.
102 FirstNet Comments at 3.
103 Harris Comments at 14.
12

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

interference-free availability of the public safety narrowband spectrum.”104 The Commonwealth of
Virginia also asserts that “a continued guard band is a necessity.”105
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.”106 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.107 FirstNet also cautions that “[its] plans could necessitate a change in the
status of the public safety guard bands” to accommodate some operations therein.108
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.”109 Similarly, Ericsson “supports allowing FirstNet
discretion on its use as long as these bands function as guard bands to protect narrowband operations.”110
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.111 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 Notice, the Commission proposed consolidating under Section 90.549 of its rules
the requirements governing certification of equipment for operation in FirstNet’s licensed spectrum.112
The Commission further observed that, under this approach, such certification would be subject to
consolidated technical rules that had themselves yet to be adopted.113 Accordingly, it suspended OET’s

104 Motorola Solutions Comments at 9.
105 Virginia Comments at 4.
106 Motorola Solutions Comments at 10.
107 NPSTC Comments at 6.
108 FirstNet Comments at 3.
109 APCO Comments at 3-4; but see Comments of APCO on FirstNet Filing, PS Docket 12-94 at 2 (September 4,
2013) (noting APCO’s “general agreement” with FirstNet’s filed comments).
110 Ericsson Comments at 6.
111 See 47 U.S.C. § 1403(a) (providing that the Commission “shall implement and enforce” the public safety
broadband provisions of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 “as if [they were] part of the
Communications Act of 1934”); see also 47 U.S.C. §§ 301 et seq.
112 Notice, 28 FCC Rcd at 2726 ¶ 35.
113 Id. at 33.
13

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

acceptance and processing of applications for equipment certification in FirstNet’s licensed spectrum
pending the adoption of the necessary technical rules.114 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 Section 90.549.115 Finally, it proposed removing from its rules a
legacy provision, Section 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.116
42.
Comments. In general, commenters support the specific proposals regarding equipment
certification set forth in the Notice. Those commenters that addressed these matters support the proposed
consolidation of requirements under Section 90.549117 and the proposed deletion of Section 90.203(p).118
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.”119
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.120 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.121 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.”122 Ericsson
further argues that “delays in certifying equipment hampe[r] the access to new and potentially life-saving
technologies by the public safety community.”123 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.”124 Harris, meanwhile, recommends that the Commission permit equipment with existing
certifications already granted under the provisions of its 2010 waiver order,125 and equipment

114 Id.
115 Id. at 35.
116 Id. at 34.
117 See Ericsson Comments at 6; General Dynamics Comments at 9; Motorola Solutions Comments at 11; TIA
Comments at 5-6.
118 See Ericsson Comments at 6-7; General Dynamics Comments at 8-9; Motorola Solutions Comments at 11.
119 General Dynamics Comments at 9.
120 See FirstNet Comments at 3; see also APCO Comments at 4; Ericsson Comments at 6; Harris Comments at 8;
Motorola Solutions Comments at 10-11; TIA Comments at 5; Charlotte Reply Comments at 2-3; Nokia Siemens
Reply Comments at 3; Sonim Technologies July 11 Ex Parte Filing; AT&T Comments on FirstNet Filing at 1-3;
NPSTC Comments on FirstNet Filing at 4.
121 FirstNet Comments at 3.
122 Comments of Motorola Solutions, PS Docket 12-94 at 10-11 (May 24, 2013); see also Reply Comments of City
of Charlotte, North Carolina, PS Docket 12-94 at 2-3 (June 10, 2013).
123 Comments of Ericsson, PS Docket 12-94 at 6 (May 24, 2013).
124 Comments of APCO at 4.
14

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

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.126 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.”127
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 Section 90.549.128 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 Commission’s rulemaking process would add unnecessary delay to providing public
safety with devices that have the latest features and functionality.”129
45.
Discussion. Our adoption in this Second Report and Order 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 Section 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 this Second Report and Order, as soon as these rules
become effective.130 We also delete Section 90.203(p) as proposed in the Notice.
46.
Moreover, as explained in more detail below, we will make this Second Report and
Order effective upon publication in the Federal Register. 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].”131 Motorola Solutions opposes the adoption of such a rule, arguing
(Continued from previous page)
125 In 2010, the Commission granted waivers to various public safety jurisdictions to pursue early deployment of
public safety broadband networks in the 763-768/793-798 MHz band. See Requests for Waiver of Various
Petitioners to Allow the Establishment of 700 MHz Interoperable Public Safety Wireless Broadband Networks, PS
Docket 06-229, Order, 25 FCC Rcd 5145 (2010) (Waiver Order). The Commission waived its equipment
authorization requirements with respect to equipment operated in these networks pending the adoption of final rules,
permitting those waiver recipients to use equipment meeting 3GPP Release 8 as specified in the Waiver Order. Id.
at 5157 ¶ 88. In 2012, the Commission terminated these waivers as part of its efforts to implement the Public Safety
Spectrum Act. See Implementing Public Safety Broadband Provisions of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job
Creation Act of 2012, PS Docket No. 12-94, Order, 27 FCC Rcd 9652 (2012) (STA Order).
126 Comments of Harris at 8; see also Harris Ex Parte Filing, PS Docket 12-94 (June 21, 2012).
127 Comments of Harris at 8.
128 See General Dynamics Comments at 9; Motorola Solutions Comments at 12; TIA Comments at 5.
129 Motorola Solutions Comments at 12.
130 The equipment certification requirements we adopt today for FirstNet’s licensed spectrum shall apply to all
equipment operated in this spectrum, including any equipment that was previously certified for operation in either of
the spectrum’s constituent bands as well as any equipment operated without Commission certification pursuant to
the Waiver Order. See Waiver Order, 25 FCC Rcd at 5157 n. 88 (granting the equipment certification waiver “until
such time as we adopt final rules”).
131 AT&T Comments at 2. See also 47 U.S.C. § 1422(b). AT&T’s proposed rule reads as follows:
(continued….)
15

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

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.”132
48.
AT&T concedes that many of the specific technical rules proposed in the Notice 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].”133 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 Notice, 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.”134 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.135 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.”136
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
(Continued from previous page)
“This Part’s technical service rules applicable to the 758-769/788-799 MHz band are designed to
help ensure that the nationwide public safety broadband network in that band is built, operated,
and maintained in accordance with commercial standards followed by the commercial mobile
service and commercial mobile data service industries for network, device, and Internet Protocol
connectivity, including standards developed by the Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP),
the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), the Alliance for Telecommunications
Industry Solutions (ATIS), the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), and the International
Telecommunication Union (ITU).” AT&T Comments at 7.
132 Reply Comments of Motorola Solutions, PS Docket 12-94 at 3 (June 10, 2013).
133 AT&T Comments at 6-7.
134 Harris Comments at 10. See also Joint Reply Comments of the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association
(NRECA) and NTCA-The Rural Broadband Association (NTCA), PS Docket 12-94 at 6-7 (June 10, 2013).
135 Id. at 11.
136 Id. at 12.
16

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

place it within the purview of Part 90.137 The only commenters to address these proposed revisions
support them.138 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,”139 and
Motorola Solutions identified for revision two additional “non-substantive” Part 27 references to the D
Block.140 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.141
52.
The Commission also proposed minor revisions to Sections 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.142 We accordingly adopt these proposals as well.

B.

Procedural Matters

1.

Effective Date

53.
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.143 We believe there is good cause for
making such rules effective immediately upon publication. As noted above, in our Notice 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,144 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 this Second Report and Order 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 this

137 Notice, 28 FCC Rcd at 2727-28 ¶¶ 40-41. The subject rules include Sections 1.9005(k) (“Included services.”),
27.6 (“Service Areas.”), 27.11 (“Initial Authorization”), 27.13 (“License Period.”), 27.14 (“Construction
requirements; Criteria for Renewal.”), 27.15 (“Geographic partitioning and spectrum disaggregation.”), 27.60
(“TV/DTV interference protection criteria”), 27.70 (“Information exchange.”), 27.303 (“Upper 700 MHz
commercial and public safety coordination zone.”), 27.501 (“746-763 MHz, 775-793 MHz, and 805-806 MHz bands
subject to competitive bidding.”), and Section 90.555 (“Information Exchange”).
138 See APCO Comments at 4-5; Motorola Solutions Comments at 12.
139 Notice, 28 FCC Rcd at 2721 ¶ 18.
140 Motorola Solutions Comments at 12 (proposing revisions to Sections 27.4, 27.6, 27.20 and 27.53). The revisions
proposed to Section 27.4 were implemented in the Report and Order. See 27 FCC Rcd at 10962-63. Section 27.53
will be revised as discussed in Section III.A.1.b. above.
141 As noted above, we believe these changes fall within the general scope of our proposal to develop a unified set of
rules for the spectrum licensed to FirstNet. In any event, however, because they are purely ministerial, specific
notice and opportunity for comment on these rule changes is unnecessary. 5 U.S.C. § 553(b)(3)(B).
142 See APCO Comments at 4-5; Ericsson Comments at 7.
143 See 5 U.S.C. § 553(d)(3).
144 See National Telecommunications and Information Administration, FirstNet Approves Resolutions on Spectrum
Lease Agreement with LA-RICS and Personnel Acquisition Strategy, http://www.ntia.doc.gov/press-
release/2013/firstnet-approves-resolutions-spectrum-lease-agreement-la-rics-and-personnel-acqu (last visited Oct.
25, 2013); National Telecommunications and Information Administration, FirstNet Approves Spectrum Lease
Agreement with New Mexico; Provides Status Update on Remaining Projects, http://www.ntia.doc.gov/press-
release/2013/firstnet-approves-spectrum-lease-agreement-new-mexico-provides-status-update-rema (last visited Oct.
25, 2013).
17

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

Second Report and Order effective upon publication in the Federal Register.145
2.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

54.
As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. § 603, the Commission has
prepared a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on
small entities. The FRFA is set forth in Appendix B.
3.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

55.
This document contains no new or modified information collection requirements subject
to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13.
4.

Congressional Review Act

56.
The Bureau will send a copy of this 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).
5.

Accessible Formats

57.
To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (Braille, large print,
electronic files, audio format), send an e-mail to FCC504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer & Governmental
Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-418-0432 (TTY). Contact the FCC to request reasonable
accommodations for filing comments (accessible format documents, sign language interpreters, CARTS,
etc.) by e-mail at FCC504@fcc.gov or by phone at 202-418-0530 (voice) or 202-418-0432 (TTY).

IV.

ORDERING CLAUSES

58.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED pursuant to sections 1, 2, 4(i), 5(c), 7, 301, 302, 303,
307, 308, 309, 310, 311, 314, 316, 319, 324, 332, 333, 336, 337 and 403 of the Communications Act of
1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 151, 152, 154(i), 155(c), 157, 301, 302, 303, 307, 308, 309, 310, 311,
314, 316, 319, 324, 332, 333, 336, 337 and 403, as well as Title VI of the Middle Class Tax Relief and
Job Creation Act of 2012, Pub. L. No. 112-96, 126 Stat. 156, that this Second Report and Order in PS
Docket No. 12-94 IS ADOPTED. This Second Report and Order shall become effective upon publication
in the Federal Register.
59.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission’s Consumer and Governmental
Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, SHALL SEND a copy of this Second Report and Order,
including the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration.
60.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Office of Engineering and Technology SHALL
RESUME its acceptance and processing of applications for equipment certification in the 758-769 MHz
and 788-799 MHz band upon publication of this Second Report and Order in the Federal Register.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Marlene H. Dortch
Secretary

145There is also good cause for making immediately effective those changes to our rules that are purely ministerial
amendments designed to reflect our new statutory mandate with respect to the D Block. 5 U.S.C. § 553(d)(3).
18

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

APPENDIX A

Final Rules

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

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), and
309, Cable Landing License Act of 1921, 47 U.S.C. 35-39, and the Middle Class Tax Relief and
Job Creation Act of 2012, Pub. L. 112-96.
2. Section 1.9005 is amended by revising paragraph (k) to read as follows:
§ 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

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.
4. Section 2.103 is amended by revising paragraph (a) introductory text and paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
§ 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:
* * *
19

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

* * * * *
(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.

PART 27 – MISCELLANEOUS WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES

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, and 337 unless otherwise noted.
6. Section 27.6 is amended by revising paragraph (b) introductory text and removing paragraph
(b)(3) to read as follows:
§ 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.
* * * * *
Section 27.11 is amended by revising paragraph (c) introductory text and removing
paragraph (c)(4) to read as follows:
§ 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 §27.5(b).
* * * * *
7. Section 27.13 is amended by revising the first sentence in paragraph (b) to read as follows:
§ 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,
20

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

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. * * *
* * * * *
8. Section 27.14 is amended by revising the first sentence in paragraph (a) and the first sentence in
paragraph (e), removing paragraphs (m) and (n), and redesignating paragraphs (o) and (p) as
paragraphs (m) and (n) to read as follows:
§ 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,
must, as a performance requirement, make a showing of "substantial service" in their license area
within the prescribed license term set forth in http://www.westlaw.com/TOC/Default.wl?rs=dfa1.0&vr=2.0&DB=1000547&DocName=47CFRS27.13&FindType=VP">§ 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. * * *
* * * * *
9. Section 27.15 is amended by revising the first sentence in paragraphs (d)(1)(i) and (d)(2)(i) to
read as follows:
§ 27.15 Geographic partitioning and spectrum disaggregation.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(1) * * *
21

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

(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, the following rules apply to
WCS and AWS licensees holding authorizations for purposes of implementing the construction
requirements set forth in § 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, the following rules apply to
WCS and AWS licensees holding authorizations for purposes of implementing the construction
requirements set forth in § 27.14. * * *
* * * * *
10. Section 27.20 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
§ 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.
* * * * *
11. Section 27.50 is amended by revising paragraph (b) introductory text, paragraphs (b)(2) through
(b)(7), (b)(7)(i), (b)(8) through (b)(10), (b)(12), (c)(5)(i), and the headings to Table 1 through
Table 4 at the end of the section to read as follows:
§ 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:
22

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

* * * * *
(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 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 §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
23

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

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 §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 27.51.
(c) * * *
24

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

(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;
* * * * *

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

Antenna height (AAT) in meters (feet)

Effective radiated power (ERP)

(watts)
Above 1372 (4500)
65
Above 1220 (4000) To 1372 (4500)
70
Above 1067 (3500) To 1220 (4000)
75
Above 915 (3000) To 1067 (3500)
100
Above 763 (2500) To 915 (3000)
140
Above 610 (2000) To 763 (2500)
200
Above 458 (1500) To 610 (2000)
350
Above 305 (1000) To 458 (1500)
600
Up to 305 (1000)
1000

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

Antenna height (AAT) in meters (feet)

Effective radiated power (ERP)

(watts)
25

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

Above 1372 (4500)
130
Above 1220 (4000) To 1372 (4500)
140
Above 1067 (3500) To 1220 (4000)
150
Above 915 (3000) To 1067 (3500)
200
Above 763 (2500) To 915 (3000)
280
Above 610 (2000) To 763 (2500)
400
Above 458 (1500) To 610 (2000)
700
Above 305 (1000) To 458 (1500)
1200
Up to 305 (1000)
2000

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

Antenna height (AAT) in meters (feet)

Effective radiated power (ERP)

per MHz (watts/MHz)
Above 1372 (4500)
65
Above 1220 (4000) To 1372 (4500)
70
Above 1067 (3500) To 1220 (4000)
75
Above 915 (3000) To 1067 (3500)
100
Above 763 (2500) To 915 (3000)
140
Above 610 (2000) To 763 (2500)
200
Above 458 (1500) To 610 (2000)
350
Above 305 (1000) To 458 (1500)
600
Up to 305 (1000)
1000
26

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

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

Effective radiated power (ERP)

Antenna height (AAT) in meters (feet)

per MHz (watts/MHz )
Above 1372 (4500)
130
Above 1220 (4000) To 1372 (4500)
140
Above 1067 (3500) To 1220 (4000)
150
Above 915 (3000) To 1067 (3500)
200
Above 763 (2500) To 915 (3000)
280
Above 610 (2000) To 763 (2500)
400
Above 458 (1500) To 610 (2000)
700
Above 305 (1000) To 458 (1500)
1200
Up to 305 (1000)
2000
12. 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),(1) and (2) and (e) to
read as follows:
§ 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 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
27

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

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.
* * * * *
13. Section 27.55 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
§ 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 §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.
14. Section 27.57 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
§ 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
28

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

operations in Mexico and Canada.
* * * * *
15. Section 27.60 is amended by revising the introductory text, paragraph (a)(1)(iii), the second
sentence in paragraph (b) introductory text, paragraph (b)(2)(i), paragraph (b)(2)(ii), paragraph
(b)(2)(ii)(A) and paragraph (b)(2)(ii)(C) to read as follows:
§ 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 dBµV/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 § 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 §
29

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

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 § 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).
* * * * *
16. Section 27.70 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b)(1), and (b)(2) to read as follows:
§ 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:
30

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

* * * * *
(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,
* * * * *
17. Section 27.303 is amended by revising paragraph (a) introductory text to read as
follows:
§ 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.
* * * * *
18. Section 27.501 is revised to read as follows:
§ 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

19. 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. No. 112-96, 126 Stat. 156.
20. Section 90.179 is amended by revising paragraph (g) to read as follows:
31

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

§ 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 § 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 § 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 § 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 § 90.523
and Federal government entities.
* * * * *
21. Section 90.203 is amended by removing paragraph (p).
22. Section 90.205 is amended by revising paragraph (j) to read as follows:
§ 90.205 Power and antenna height limits.
* * * * *
(j) 758-775 MHz and 788-805 MHz. Power and height limitations are specified in §§ 90.541 and
90.542.
* * * * *
23. Section 90.523 is amended by revising the introductory paragraph, and revising paragraph (e), to
read as follows:
§ 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
32

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

First Responder Network Authority.
24. Section 90.533 is amended by revising the introductory paragraph and paragraphs (a) and (c) to
read as follows:
§ 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 § 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.
25. Section 90.542 is amended by revising paragraph (a) introductory text, paragraphs (a)(1) through
(a)(8), Tables 1 through 4, and paragraph (b) to read as follows:
§ 90.542 Broadband transmitting power limits.
(a) The following power limits apply to the 758-768/788-798 MHz band:
(1) Fixed and base stations transmitting a signal in the 758-768 MHz band 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.
33

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

(2) 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 758-768 MHz band 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.
(3) Fixed and base stations transmitting a signal in the 758-768 MHz band 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 greater than 305 m HAAT are permitted if power levels are
reduced below 1000 watts/MHz ERP accordance with Table 3 of this section.
(4) 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 758-768 MHz band 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.
(5) Licensees of fixed or base stations transmitting a signal in the 758-768 MHz band at an ERP
greater than 1000 watts must comply with the provisions set forth in paragraph (b) of this section.
(6) Control stations and mobile stations transmitting in the 758-768 MHz band and the 788-798
MHz band are limited to 30 watts ERP.
(7) Portable stations (hand-held devices) transmitting in the 758-768 MHz band and the 788-798
MHz band are limited to 3 watts ERP.
(8) For transmissions in the 758-768 MHz and 788-798 MHz bands, licensees may employ
equipment operating in compliance with either of the following measurement techniques:
* * * * *
34

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

Table 1 - Permissible Power and Antenna Heights for Base and Fixed in the

758-768 MHz Band Transmitting a Signal with an Emission Bandwidth of 1

MHz or Less

Antenna height (AAT) in meters (feet)

Effective radiated power (ERP)

(watts)
Above 1372 (4500)
65
Above 1220 (4000) To 1372 (4500)
70
Above 1067 (3500) To 1220 (4000)
75
Above 915 (3000) To 1067 (3500)
100
Above 763 (2500) To 915 (3000)
140
Above 610 (2000) To 763 (2500)
200
Above 458 (1500) To 610 (2000)
350
Above 305 (1000) To 458 (1500)
600
Up to 305 (1000)
1000

Table 2 – Permissible Power and Antenna Heights for Base and Fixed

Stations in the 758-768 MHz Band Transmitting a Signal with an Emission

Bandwidth of 1 MHz or Less

Antenna height (AAT) in meters (feet)

Effective radiated power (ERP)

(watts)
Above 1372 (4500)
130
Above 1220 (4000) To 1372 (4500)
140
Above 1067 (3500) To 1220 (4000)
150
Above 915 (3000) To 1067 (3500)
200
Above 763 (2500) To 915 (3000)
280
35

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

Above 610 (2000) To 763 (2500)
400
Above 458 (1500) To 610 (2000)
700
Above 305 (1000) To 458 (1500)
1200
Up to 305 (1000)
2000

Table 3 – Permissible Power and Antenna Heights for Base and Fixed

Stations in the 758-768 MHz Band Transmitting a Signal with an Emission

Bandwidth Greater than 1 MHz

Antenna height (AAT) in meters (feet)

Effective radiated power (ERP)

per MHz (watts/MHz)
Above 1372 (4500)
65
Above 1220 (4000) To 1372 (4500)
70
Above 1067 (3500) To 1220 (4000)
75
Above 915 (3000) To 1067 (3500)
100
Above 763 (2500) To 915 (3000)
140
Above 610 (2000) To 763 (2500)
200
Above 458 (1500) To 610 (2000)
350
Above 305 (1000) To 458 (1500)
600
Up to 305 (1000)
1000

Table 4 – Permissible Power and Antenna Heights for Base and Fixed

Stations in the 758-768 MHz Band Transmitting a Signal with an Emission

Bandwidth Greater than 1 MHz

Effective radiated power (ERP)

Antenna height (AAT) in meters (feet)

per MHz (watts/MHz )
36

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

Above 1372 (4500)
130
Above 1220 (4000) To 1372 (4500)
140
Above 1067 (3500) To 1220 (4000)
150
Above 915 (3000) To 1067 (3500)
200
Above 763 (2500) To 915 (3000)
280
Above 610 (2000) To 763 (2500)
400
Above 458 (1500) To 610 (2000)
700
Above 305 (1000) To 458 (1500)
1200
Up to 305 (1000)
2000
(b) For base and fixed stations operating in the 758-768 MHz band in accordance with the
provisions of paragraph (a)(5) of this section, 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.
26. Section 90.543 is amended by revising the introductory paragraph, revising paragraph (e)
introductory text, adding new paragraph (e)(3), redesignating existing paragraph (e)(3) as (e)(4),
adding new paragraph (e)(5), and revising paragraph (f) to read as follows:
§ 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:
37

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

* * * * *
(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.
* * * * *
27. Section 90.549 is revised to read as follows:
§ 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 § 90.203.
28. Section 90.555 is amended by revising paragraph (a) introductory text, paragraph (b)(1),
paragraph (b)(2), paragraph (c)(1), and paragraph (c)(2) to read as follows:
§ 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
38

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

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.
39

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

APPENDIX B

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

1.
As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),1 the Commission has prepared this
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on small
entities of rules adopted in this Second Report and Order in PS Docket 12-94. The Commission sought
comment on such impact in an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) prepared in connection with
the Notice in which the rules were proposed.2 No commenters directly responded to the IRFA.

A.

Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules

2.
In this Second Report and Order, 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.

B.

Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Comments in Response to IRFA

3.
No commenters directly responded to the IRFA. A number of commenters expressed
support in general for the consolidation of technical rules that we effect in this Second Report and Order.
Also, no commenters expressed the view that such consolidation of rules would have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

C.

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.3 The RFA generally defines
the term “small entity” as having the same meaning as the terms “small business,” “small organization,”
and “small governmental jurisdiction.”4 In addition, the term “small business” has the same meaning as
the term “small business concern” under the Small Business Act.5 A “small business concern” is one
which: (1) is independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3)

1 See 5 U.S.C. § 603. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. § 601 et. seq., has been amended by the Contract With America Advancement Act of
1996, Pub. L. No. 104-121, 110 Stat. 847 (1996) (CWAAA). Title II of the CWAAA is the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA).
2 See Implementing Public Safety Broadband Provisions of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of
2012 et al., PS Docket 12-94 et al., Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 28 FCC Rcd 2715, 2752 app. B (2013).
3 5 U.S.C. § 604(a)(3).
4 5 U.S.C. § 601(6).
5 5 U.S.C. § 601(3) (incorporating by reference the definition of “small-business concern” in the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. §
632). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 601(3), the statutory definition of a small business applies “unless an agency, after consultation with
the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration and after opportunity for public comment, establishes one or more
definitions of such term which are appropriate to the activities of the agency and publishes such definition(s) in the Federal
Register.” 5 U.S.C. § 601(3).
40

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business Administration (“SBA”).6 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 this Notice.
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.7 First, nationwide,
there are a total of approximately 27.5 million small businesses, according to the SBA.8 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.”9 Nationwide, as of 2007, there were approximately 1,621,315
small organizations.10 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.”11 Census Bureau data for 2011 indicate that there were 89,476 local
governmental jurisdictions in the United States.12 We estimate that, of this total, as many as 88, 506
entities may qualify as “small governmental jurisdictions.”13 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.14 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

6 15 U.S.C. § 632.
7 See 5 U.S.C. §§ 601(3)–(6).
8 See SBA, Office of Advocacy, “Frequently Asked Questions,” web.sba.gov/faqs (last visited May 6,2011; figures are from
2009).
9 5 U.S.C. § 601(4).
10 INDEPENDENT SECTOR, THE NEW NONPROFIT ALMANAC & DESK REFERENCE (2010).
11 5 U.S.C. § 601(5).
12 U.S. CENSUS BUREAU, STATISTICAL ABSTRACT OF THE UNITED STATES: 2011, Table 427 (2007)
13The 2007 U.S Census data for small governmental organizations indicate that there were 89, 476 “Local Governments” in 2007.
(U.S. CENSUS BUREAU, STATISTICAL ABSTRACT OF THE UNITED STATES 2011, Table 428.) The criterion by which
the size of such local governments is determined to be small is a population of 50,000. However, since the Census Bureau does
not specifically apply that criterion, it cannot be determined with precision how many of such local governmental organizations is
small. Nonetheless, the inference seems reasonable that substantial number of these governmental organizations has a population
of less than 50, 000. To look at Table 428 in conjunction with a related set of data in Table 429 in the Census’s Statistical
Abstract of the U.S., that inference is further supported by the fact that in both Tables, many entities that may well be small are
included in the 89,476 local governmental organizations, e.g. county, municipal, township and town, school district and special
district entities. Measured by a criterion of a population of 50,000 many specific sub-entities in this category seem more likely
than larger county-level governmental organizations to have small populations. Accordingly, of the 89,746 small governmental
organizations identified in the 2007 Census, the Commission estimates that a substantial majority is small.
14 See subparts A and B of Part 90 of the Commission’s Rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 90.1-90.22. Police licensees serve state, county, and
municipal enforcement through telephony (voice), telegraphy (code), and teletype and facsimile (printed material). Fire licensees
are comprised of private volunteer or professional fire companies, as well as units under governmental control. Public Safety
Radio Pool licensees also include state, county, or municipal entities that use radio for official purposes. State departments of
conservation and private forest organizations comprise forestry service licensees that set up communications networks among fire
lookout towers and ground crews. State and local governments are highway maintenance licensees that provide emergency and
routine communications to aid other public safety services to keep main roads safe for vehicular traffic. Emergency medical
licensees use these channels for emergency medical service communications related to the delivery of emergency medical
treatment. Additional licensees include medical services, rescue organizations, veterinarians, persons with disabilities, disaster
relief organizations, school buses, beach patrols, establishments in isolated areas, communications standby facilities, and
emergency repair of public communications facilities.
41

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

business entities engaged in radiotelephone communications employing no more than 1,500 persons.15
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.16 There are 2,442 licenses in the 4.9 GHz band, based on an FCC Universal Licensing System
search of May 23, 2012.17 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.18 Accordingly, we do not believe the technical service rules adopted in this Second Report and
Order
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.19 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 Report and Order 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 Report and Order 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.”20 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.21 Thus,
under that size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small.

15 See 13 C.F.R. § 121.201, NAICS code 517210.
16 This figure was derived from Commission licensing records as of June 27, 2008. Licensing numbers change on a daily basis.
We do not expect this number to be significantly smaller today. This does not indicate the number of licensees, as licensees may
hold multiple licenses. There is no information currently available about the number of public safety licensees that have less than
1,500 employees.
17 Based on an FCC Universal Licensing System search of May 23, 2012. Search parameters: Radio Service = PA – Public
Safety 4940-4990 MHz Band; Authorization Type = Regular; Status = Active.
18 See Spectrum Act § 6206(b). The statute contemplates that portions of the network may be deployed by State governments,
see Spectrum Act § 6302(e), which are categorically excluded from the definition of “small governmental jurisdictions” for
purposes of RFA.
19 See, e.g., Mid-Tex Elec. Co-op., Inc. v. F.E.R.C., 773 F.2d 327, 334 (D.C. Cir. 1985).
20 The NAICS Code for this service 334220. See 13 C.F.R 121/201. See also
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/IBQTable?_bm=y&-fds_name=EC0700A1&-geo_id=&-_skip=300&;-
ds_name=EC0731SG2&-_lang=en
21 See http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/IBQTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=&-fds_name=EC0700A1&-_skip=4500&;-
ds_name=EC0731SG3&-_lang=en
42

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

D.

Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements

9.
The technical service rules adopted in this Second Report and Order 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 Report and Order 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 adopted in the Second Report and Order 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.

E.

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.”22
12.
As previously discussed, the rules adopted in this Second Report and Order 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 this Second Report and Order, 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.

F.

Federal Rules that May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed Rule

14.
None.

22 5 U.S.C. §§ 603(c)(1)-(c)(4).
43

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

STATEMENT OF

ACTING FCC CHAIRWOMAN MIGNON L. CLYBURN

Re:

Implementing Public Safety Broadband Provisions of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job
Creation Act of 2012

, PS Docket No. 12-94; Implementing a Nationwide, Broadband,
Interoperable Public Safety Network in the 700 MHz Band
, PS Docket No. 06-229; Service
Rules for the 698–746, 747–762, and 777–792 MHz Bands
, WT Docket No. 06-150.
Hurricane Sandy made landfall in the United States one year ago tomorrow with a force so
traumatic that an area stretching over 1000 miles, from Florida to Maine, was impacted. Sandy reminded
us once again of the importance of communications during disasters – that it is vital for all Americans,
particularly our brave public safety responders, who risk their lives every day to keep our communities
safe. After that storm, the Commission conducted a series of field hearings to see what lessons we could
learn from this historic, catastrophic event. On the anniversary of Sandy, it is fitting that the Commission
is moving forward with yet another item that will help improve public safety communications.
When Congress enacted the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, it provided a
solid framework for a nationwide interoperable public safety broadband network – a network that the
public safety community needs and deserves to protect our communities. In concert with the First
Responder Network Authority (FirstNet) and the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA), the Commission is working to ensure the success of this first-of-its-kind network.
Today, the Commission meets its Congressional directive by adopting important technical rules
for the 700 MHz public safety broadband spectrum. These clear rules will advance FirstNet’s mission by
spurring innovation and competition in the market for public safety broadband equipment. The rules
provide urgently needed clarity for equipment manufacturers, and will facilitate prompt product
development to support the early adopters in this band, and to meet FirstNet’s deployment time line. The
rules will also fulfill the Commission’s obligation to provide interference protection to other Commission
licensees, ensuring that users in adjacent spectrum can continue to operate without harmful interference.
Today’s action addresses the most pressing concern in this proceeding: technical rules for the
public safety band, which provide vendors with the lead time necessary to bring equipment to the
marketplace. However, we also remain aware of the other outstanding issues in this docket and
understand the importance of their timely resolution. We will continue to work with all stakeholders to
ensure that these issues are addressed.
I would like to thank the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau and the Office of
Engineering of Technology for their work on this issue, along with the International Bureau, Wireless
Bureau, and the Office of General Counsel. In particular, I’d like to thank Bureau Chief David Turetsky,
and staff members Brain Hurley, Gene Fullano, Rasoul Safavian, Erika Olsen, Behzad Ghaffari and Yoon
Chang in the Public Safety Bureau, for their contributions in bringing this item to the Commission today.
44

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

STATEMENT OF

COMMISSIONER JESSICA ROSENWORCEL

Re:

Implementing Public Safety Broadband Provisions of the Middle Class Tax Relief and
Job Creation Act of 2012,

PS Docket No. 12-94; Implementing a Nationwide, Broadband,
Interoperable Public Safety Network in the 700 MHz Band,

PS Docket No. 06-229; Service
Rules for the 698-746, 747-762 and 777-792 MHz Bands

, WT Docket No. 06-150.
Our efforts today are a small piece of something historic. History was made in last year’s Middle
Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act. It was in this law that Congress came together and determined to
right a long-standing wrong. More than a decade after the horror of 9/11 and many years after the watery
devastation of Hurricane Katrina, Congress sought to help public safety officials across the country by
doing something very simple—putting them all on the same airwaves. This facilitates interoperability,
enhances functionality, and creates scale that over time could reduce the cost of first responder
communications. But more than that, it means that those who wear the shield will be able to
communicate better in crisis and make us more safe.
Congress sought to make all of this happen through the First Responder Network Authority—or
FirstNet. Specifically, Congress charged FirstNet with the responsibility to help develop and operate a
nationwide, interoperable, public safety wireless broadband network using spectrum in the 700 MHz
band.
When FirstNet’s board was first put in place fourteen months ago, they faced a steep climb. They
had to stand up an organization from scratch. They had to build their efforts on essential input from
public safety officials across the country. They had to consider how this network would be deployed in a
way that is smart, cost effective, and consistent with congressional goals.
This is a bold undertaking. Getting it done will require grit, gumption, and moving beyond the
conventional wisdom. But historic efforts usually do. And because progress sometimes occurs only in
obscurity, I think it is worth itemizing the good work done to date.
First, the organization. FirstNet is now staffed by full-time employees. This includes a well-
respected permanent management team with extensive experience in wireless networks, public safety
communications, governmental outreach, and financial management. Plus, more help is on its way. The
board recently approved a $194 million budget that will be used for—among other things—additional
hiring to support its work.
Second, the outreach. To make sure the voice of public safety is always heard, the FirstNet board
established a Public Safety Advisory Committee. This committee is made up of 41 individuals from
every segment of the public safety community—from state, local, and tribal entities to technology experts
and security officials.
As part of its outreach efforts, the board has also acknowledged that the most important input is
not from Washington. It is from those on the front lines. So from its very first day, FirstNet reached out
to state and local public safety officials. It has held six regional workshops at which every state and
virtually every territory participated.
Third, the network. FirstNet has been laying the foundation for the network it will develop
through a series of public-private partnerships. Last year, the Commission helped move this effort along
by establishing a board that developed minimum technical standards to ensure nationwide interoperability
for the network.
But FirstNet has gone further. It has issued 11 requests for information, seeking industry input on
45

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

wireless devices, network partnering and provisioning, antenna systems, satellite service, enhanced packet
core specifications, data centers, network operation centers and more. More importantly—industry has
responded with 340 jam-packed filings dense with information FirstNet will consider as its proceeds.
Finally, some locations are beyond the planning stages and are already moving ahead. To this
end, the board has approved spectrum leases with a major city, Los Angeles, and an entire state, New
Mexico.
So what’s next? That is where our decision today comes in. It is small but important. We
respond to a call from FirstNet for consolidated service rules for their spectrum. Consolidated service
rules make it possible to develop and certify new equipment for the public safety network. They establish
the technical underpinnings for public safety communications to flourish in this band without disturbing
their spectral neighbors. But it is just as important to note what these rules do not do. Our rules are
streamlined. They do not layer on unnecessary requirements or duplicate build-out obligations already in
the law. That is not what Congress asked us to do, that is not what we do here. Instead, we make
decisions to help FirstNet get off the ground and get down to the business of improving public safety.
46

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 13-137

STATEMENT OF

COMMISSIONER AJIT PAI

Re:

Implementing Public Safety Broadband Provisions of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job
Creation Act of 2012

, PS Docket No. 12-94; Implementing a Nationwide, Broadband,
Interoperable Public Safety Network in the 700 MHz Band
, PS Docket No. 06-229; Service
Rules for the 698–746, 747–762, and 777–792 MHz Bands
, WT Docket No. 06-150.
This morning’s Order takes technical rules found in Part 27 and Part 90 for the 700 MHz public
safety broadband spectrum and consolidates them into a harmonized set of Part 90 rules. By giving the
private sector technical certainty and paving the way for the prompt certification of devices, today’s item
should help the equipment market for the 700 MHz public safety band to develop and innovation to
flourish. The end result hopefully will be a bevy of nationally portable, interoperable public safety
broadband devices.
Today’s action is important. But our duty to the nation’s first responders does not end with it.
The First Responder Network Authority is still getting off the ground, and we must maintain continued
oversight over the spectrum license we have granted it. There are also complicated issues regarding
incumbent narrowband users in this spectrum which must be addressed. And critically, we need to stay
on course with our spectrum auctions so that FirstNet is adequately funded. That means holding a
successful H Block auction in January. That means designing the rules of the incentive auction with an
eye towards maximizing the net revenues produced by that auction. And that means finding creative
solutions and working collaboratively with federal users and the private sector to clear and auction prime
spectrum like the 1755–1780 MHz band.
I commend the staff of the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau for their continued hard
work on this and the many other proceedings necessary to meet the objectives that Congress set forth in
the Spectrum Act. Thanks to your efforts, I am confident that the Commission’s efforts in this area will
prove successful.
47

Document Outline


Note: We are currently transitioning our documents into web compatible formats for easier reading. We have done our best to supply this content to you in a presentable form, but there may be some formatting issues while we improve the technology. The original version of the document is available as a PDF, Word Document, or as plain text.

close
FCC

You are leaving the FCC website

You are about to leave the FCC website and visit a third-party, non-governmental website that the FCC does not maintain or control. The FCC does not endorse any product or service, and is not responsible for, nor can it guarantee the validity or timeliness of the content on the page you are about to visit. Additionally, the privacy policies of this third-party page may differ from those of the FCC.