Skip Navigation

Federal Communications Commission

English Display Options

Commission Document Attachment





Amendment of the Commission’s Rules with Regard to Commercial Operations in the 1695-1710
MHz, 1755-1780 MHz, and 2155-2180 MHz Bands, GN Docket No. 13-185

With this Order, the Commission expedites the allocation of flexible use spectrum so wireless
providers can better satisfy the ever increasing consumer demand for mobile broadband services. The
initiative to pair the 1755 to 1780 and 2155 to 2180 bands has been a painstaking effort involving the
wireless industry, federal agencies, and NAB that has spanned several years. But there is nothing like a
federal statute with a tight deadline for licensing spectrum to encourage parties to reassess what really
matters, find common ground, and do the right thing for the American public. I commend all relevant
stakeholders who helped us reach this point.
My review of the policy decisions, in this Order, begins with the trends we are seeing in the
mobile wireless market. Each year, the percentage of American adults who are cutting the cord and
relying solely on mobile is increasing. For those living below the poverty line, the figure is now at 56
percent, and robust competition is the best way to provide them with affordable choices. But
consolidation, secondary market transactions, and difficult investment markets have substantially reduced
the number of competitive options for consumers. For example, in the 2006 AWS-1 auction, 104 bidders
won 1,087 licenses. Now, four carriers hold 1,000 of those licenses. After carefully considering all the
arguments on the band plan, I was more persuaded by the view that smaller block sizes and license areas
could enhance competition, and yes, I would have preferred a different band plan.
However, the effort to repurpose federal spectrum for commercial use requires compromise and,
in addition to promoting competition, we must consider other policy goals including the fact that the
Commercial Spectrum Enhancement Act requires us to design an auction, which returns 110 percent of
the total estimated relocation costs of federal users. Since future efforts to repurpose spectrum will
involve more difficult policy issues, compromise will become increasingly important going forward. I
appreciate Chairman Wheeler’s decision to propose an alternative plan that better addresses the concerns
of smaller carriers.
I am also pleased that the Order mandates interoperability between the AWS-1 and AWS-3
bands. In the 2013 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, we explained that the proposed AWS-3 bands are
immediately adjacent to the AWS-1 bands, that we are proposing technical rules for uplink and downlink
operations in the AWS-3 band that are consistent with those operations in the AWS-1 band,1 agreed with
T-Mobile that “the creation of an additional AWS allocation immediately adjacent to the current AWS-1
allocation will allow for more immediate equipment development and deployment,” and tentatively
concluded “that having additional spectrum that is adjacent to that used for like services will promote
efficiency in broadband deployment.”2 We sought comment on proposed technical rules, our tentative
conclusions, the competitive effects of our proposed rules, and asked commenters to address any other
rules not specifically identified in the Notice.3

1 See Amendment of the Commission’s Rules with Regard to Commercial Operations in the 1695-1710 MHz, 1755-
1780 MHz, and 2155-2180 MHz Bands, WT Docket No. 13-185, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Order on
, 28 FCC Rcd 11479, 11495 ¶ 30, 11496 ¶ 33 (2013) (AWS-3 NPRM).
2 Id. at 11495 ¶ 30.
3 Id. at 11517 ¶ 85.

In response, several parties supported this proposal for a number of reasons, including that
consistent technical rules would facilitate use of the AWS-3 spectrum and interoperability across these
AWS bands. Some of these parties specifically asked the Commission to adopt a requirement that
devices manufactured for the AWS-3 band be interoperable with the AWS-1 band. I agree with those
who contend that an interoperability requirement would promote timely access to mobile devices across
these bands and prevent the difficult situation smaller carriers are experiencing in the lower 700 MHz
bands, which we auctioned in 2008. I am also pleased that the Order has strong language promoting a
voluntary solution that would extend interoperability to the AWS-4 band. For these reasons, I am voting
to approve today’s Order.
I want to acknowledge Roger Sherman, Ruth Milkman, Julie Knapp, and all former Wireless
Bureau and OET Chiefs, whose efforts over the years are finally coming to fruition. I also want to
acknowledge my wireless advisor, Louis Peraertz, for his wise counsel. To those who were involved in
negotiating with federal agencies and crafting the important service and technical rules in this Order –
well done. As the Order makes clear, more work is necessary before we can auction and license this
spectrum; so no rest for the weary. In addition to setting auctions procedures, we should also give the
public as much information as possible about geographic areas that will require coordination with federal
operations. I know you will approach those tasks with the same diligence and skill that you have shown
so far. Thank you.

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, , or as plain text.


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.