                              Before the
                    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
                         Washington, DC 20554

In the Matter of                        )
                                        )
Allocation of Spectrum Below            ) ET Docket No.  94-32
5 GHz Transferred from                  )
Federal Government Use                  )        

                     NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE MAKING 

Adopted: October 20, 1994                 Released: November 8, 1994

Comment Date: December 19, 1994
Reply Comment Date: January 3, 1995

By the Commission:

                             I.  INTRODUCTION

     By this action, we propose allocations for 50 megahertz of spectrum that
was identified by the Department of Commerce for transfer from Federal
Government to private sector use.  The spectrum we are considering is at the
bands 2390-2400 MHz, 2402-2417 MHz, and 4660-4685 MHz.  We believe that the
allocations proposed herein will benefit the public by providing for the
introduction of new services and the enhancement of existing services.  These
new and enhanced services will create new jobs, foster economic growth, and
improve access to communications by industry and the American public.  

                           II.  BACKGROUND

     On August 10, 1993, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993
(Reconciliation Act) was signed into law.  The Reconciliation Act required
that the Secretary of Commerce identify 200 megahertz of spectrum currently
allocated for use by Federal Government agencies, for transfer to the FCC for
use by the private sector.  All of the 200 megahertz of spectrum recommended
for reallocation must be located below 5 gigahertz, with at least 100
megahertz of this being below 3 gigahertz.  The Reconciliation Act also
required the Secretary of Commerce to issue within six months of its
enactment a report making a preliminary identification of reallocatable bands
of frequencies and to issue within 18 months a final report recommending the
spectrum for reallocation.  In its report making a preliminary identification
of spectrum, the Department of Commerce was required to identify at least 50
megahertz of spectrum for immediate reallocation.  The remaining spectrum is
to be made available over a ten-year period.  

     On February 10, 1994, the Department of Commerce released its report
making a preliminary identification of spectrum for reallocation (Preliminary
Report).  The frequency bands identified for reallocation in the Preliminary
Report are listed in Appendix A.  Three of these frequency bands, 2390-2400
MHz, 2402-2417 MHz, and 4660-4685 MHz, were identified for immediate
reallocation.  The Reconciliation Act also requires that the Commission
allocate, and propose regulations to assign, the 50 megahertz of spectrum
that is immediately available no later than 18 months after its enactment.  

     Accordingly, on May 4, 1994, we released a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) in
this proceeding seeking information on potential applications for the 50
megahertz of spectrum that is being transferred immediately from Federal
Government to private sector use.  We stated in the NOI that spectrum
reallocated for private sector use has the potential to provide for the
continued growth and development of advanced communications and technologies,
thereby creating new high technology jobs and economic growth.  Although the
spectrum considered in this proceeding has some characteristics that will
affect its future use by non-Government applications, we believe that all of
the spectrum can be used to promote advanced technologies and provide
economic growth.  In response to our NOI, we received 77 comments and 17
reply comments.  These comments are summarized in Appendix D.  

     Internationally, 2390-2400 MHz is allocated in Region 2 on a primary
basis to the fixed, mobile, and radiolocation services, and on a secondary
basis to the amateur service.  Domestically, this band is currently allocated
on a secondary basis to the amateur service.  In its Preliminary Report, the
Department of Commerce expresses concern over the effect of future
non-Government use on the National Astronomy and Ionospheric Center, which
operates a planetary research radar at Arecibo, Puerto Rico at 2380 MHz.  To
protect these radio astronomy operations, the Department of Commerce states
that the 2390-2400 MHz band should not be used for airborne or space-to-Earth
links, and that restrictions on terrestrial operations in the vicinity of the
Puerto Rico planetary research radar facility may be necessary.  

     The 2402-2417 MHz band is allocated internationally in Region 2 on a
primary basis to the fixed, mobile, and radiolocation services, and on a
secondary basis to the amateur service.  Domestically, the band is currently
allocated on a secondary basis to the amateur service.  The 2402-2417 MHz
band lies within the 2400-2500 MHz band that is available for use by
industrial, scientific, and medical (ISM) applications.  Radio services
operating within this band must accept harmful interference that may be
caused by ISM devices, which include a large number of microwave ovens
commonly used in households.  In addition, the 2400-2483.5 MHz band is
available domestically for use by equipment authorized under Part 15 of the
Rules.  

     Internationally, 4660-4685 MHz is allocated in Region 2 on a primary
basis for fixed, fixed-satellite, and mobile services.  This band is
allocated domestically on a primary basis for non-government fixed-satellite
service space-to-Earth links, with use limited to international
inter-continental systems.  However, there is currently no non- Government
use of this band.  An agreement with Canada requires that certain United
States Government terrestrial line of sight and troposcatter systems be
coordinated with Canada.  This agreement also permits use of this band by
airborne or other mobile stations but requires that such stations protect
Canadian systems.  

                           III.  DISCUSSION
        
     We are now considering allocating the spectrum at 2390-2400 MHz, 2402-
2417 MHz and 4660-4685 MHz for new or developing services, or to provide
spectrum to reaccommodate existing services.  In response to our NOI
initiating this proceeding we received a number of competing and generally
mutually exclusive proposals and requests, many of which might benefit the
public.  Our principal objective in making this spectrum allocation decision
is to ensure that the spectrum is put to its best and most valued use and
that the greatest benefit to the public is attained.  We believe that the way
to achieve this goal is to adopt a broad and general allocation.  Such an
approach would allow for flexible use of these bands so that licensees would
be able to offer a wide range of services employing varying technologies. 
This approach is similar to one taken in ET Docket No.  92-9, where we
redesignated spectrum in the 2 GHz range for emerging technologies.  In that
proceeding, we allocated 220 megahertz of spectrum to Fixed and Mobile
services and identified it for use by emerging technologies.  Later, we
provided for the personal communications services (PCS) to use 140 megahertz
of this spectrum.  The remainder is available for future use.  

     We therefore request comment on an allocation approach that would
designate the 2390-2400 MHz, 2402-2417 MHz and 4660-4685 MHz bands for
general Fixed and Mobile services, rather than specify these frequency bands
for particular uses.  In this context, we believe such a flexible allocation
that relies substantially on market forces may be appropriate.  We also
believe that under such an approach most of the services to be provided in
this spectrum would likely meet the statutory criteria for auctions. 
Therefore, we are proposing to make licenses for this spectrum available
though competitive bidding, to the extent possible and practicable.  We also
believe it is important to provide for a market structure that provides for
competition in the provision of new services.  A competitive market structure
would promote economical prices for users and provide operators with
incentives to develop and introduce innovative service features and
technologies.  One approach for developing a competitive market structure
would be to divide the spectrum into channel blocks of one to two megahertz. 
Licensees would be given exclusive use of these channels within a specified
geographic area.  We request comment on this approach and the appropriate
amount of spectrum to specify for a channel block and the extent of the
geographic areas to which channel blocks would be licensed.  

     We propose to allow technical flexibility in the provision of services. 
In particular, we propose to allow users freedom to choose the
channelization, signal strength, modulation techniques and antenna
characteristics they employ in providing service, consistent with not causing
interference to other users.  Interference to operations in adjacent service
areas would be controlled through power limits at the service area
boundaries.  Licensees would also be free to negotiate and develop agreements
for interference conditions at the boundaries between their service areas. 
We request comment on these proposals for the rules for technical operation. 
We particularly request comment on what the appropriate interference
standards should be under such an approach. For personal communications
services (PCS), we have adopted a standard that requires that the predicted
or measured mean field strength at any location on the border of the PCS
service area not exceed 47 dBuV/m unless the parties agree to a higher field
strength.  We request comment on whether this standard would be appropriate
for use in these bands.  

     While we believe that the above plan for allocation to Fixed and Mobile
services would ensure that the spectrum is used for services that are most
highly valued by the public, we also recognize that such an approach may be
difficult to implement given certain factors that are unique to these bands. 
For example, there are incumbent amateur users in the 2390-2400 MHz and
2402-2417 MHz bands and the 2402-2417 MHz band is affected by emissions from
ISM devices, including millions of household microwave ovens.  In addition, a
growing number of unlicensed Part 15 devices are also operating in this band.
Accordingly, we believe it is appropriate also to solicit comment on
identifying specific communications services as an alternative to relying
only upon the general allocation.  A number of such proposals were presented
in the comments to the NOI and are discussed below.  

     In the 2390-2400 MHz band, In-Flight Phone Corporation (In-Flight)
proposed an allocation for an aeronautical audio/visual service (AAVS). 
In-Flight's AAVS proposal has the potential to furnish commercial air
travelers with real time video and audio information and entertainment
services.  According to In-Flight, the AAVS would be able to share spectrum
with the Amateur and other services and, because it would be a ground-to-air
service, would not present an interference problem for adjacent channel space
research and radioastronomy operations.  

     Another alternative for the 2390-2400 MHz band is a proposal from
Southwestern Bell that this band be paired with the 2300-2310 MHz band and be
used for wireless local loop service.  As described by Southwestern Bell, a
wireless local loop service would be enable a Local Exchange Carrier (LEC) to
provide telephone service to the home via radio links rather than through a
copper or fiber cable to each home.  According to Southwestern Bell, the
benefits of a wireless local loop service include reduced costs in providing
telephone service to new customers, reduced telephone service maintenance
costs, and rapid deployment of telephone service to new customers. 
Southwestern Bell further states that because of the high density of use in
any particular area, a wireless local loop service would not be compatible
with Amateur use of the spectrum.  

     We observe that this spectrum also could be used to provide unlicensed
PCS or Multipoint Distribution Service (MDS).  One possibility would be to
provide unlicensed PCS services in either or both of the 2300-2310 MHz and
2390-2400 MHz bands.  Alternatively, the 2300-2310 MHz and 2390-2400 MHz
bands could be used to accommodate the MDS currently operating at 2150-2160
MHz, freeing that spectrum for unlicensed PCS.  

     There may also be benefit in using either the 2390-2400 MHz or the
2300-2310 MHz band for intelligent vehicle highway systems (IVHS).  Motorola
suggests that spectrum under consideration in this proceeding may be suitable
for short range IVHS services.  

     In response to the NOI, we received several other suggestions for use of
the 2390-2400 MHz band.  These uses include interactive video in rural areas,
low power communications, mobile-satellite service (MSS), and advanced
private communications.  We believe, however, that most of these uses are
already adequately accommodated in other bands, could be accommodated under
our general allocation proposal for these bands, or may not be suitable for
the 2390-2400 MHz band.  We request comments on our conclusions regarding
these other alternatives.  We invite comments on any other services that
might be provided in this spectrum.  Parties supporting alternative proposals
for this band should address the compatibility of the proposed service with
the Amateur and other services.  Commenting parties should also provide a
cost/benefit analysis for the service, along with specific information
regarding operating parameters and any other relevant information.  We also
note that, while we have not specifically identified spectrum for advanced
private communications as requested by the Coalition of Private Users of
Emerging Multimedia Technologies (COPE), private users can receive service
from commercial service providers and can compete in obtaining spectrum on
the same basis as commercial providers.  Additionally, we will continue to
consider COPE's request for spectrum as we determine uses for additional
spectrum being reallocated from Federal Government use under the
Reconciliation Act.  

     Several of the alternatives for allocating the 2390-2400 MHz band
discussed above also consider use of 2300-2310 MHz.  The 2300-2310 MHz band
was identified for reallocation in the Department of Commerce's Preliminary
Report to be available in January 1996.  However, in our August 9, 1994,
report to the Secretary, U.S.  Department of Commerce we suggested that this
band be made available for private sector use immediately.  Also, in the NOI
in this proceeding, we requested comment on the benefits of pairing this band
with the 2390-2400 MHz band.  Because this band has only preliminarily been
identified for reallocation, and is subject to change in the Department of
Commerce's final report, we may request further comment later on the
allocation of 2300-2310 MHz.  Nevertheless, if we determine that it is in the
public interest, we may allocate this band in the Report and Order in this
proceeding adopting allocations for the 50 megahertz of spectrum already made
available.  Accordingly, we ask parties to comment on how we should allocate
the 2300-2310 MHz band as well.  

     In the 2402-2417 MHz band, the presence of ISM equipment, unlicensed
devices (particularly spread spectrum devices authorized under 47 C.F.R.
15.247), and other non-Government users present a particularly challenging
environment in which to implement new radio services.  Any equipment
operating in this band must use transmission schemes that are extremely
robust and versatile.  Commenters to our NOI indicate that many of the
companies currently manufacturing unlicensed Part 15 equipment for the
902-928 MHz band have begun to develop or modify this equipment for use at
2400-2483.5 MHz and several firms are selling devices for use in this band. 
We also note that Part 15 use is consistent with a number of suggestions for
use of this spectrum, such as in-building voice and data systems, and small
area communications.  All of these uses can be accommodated under Part 15 of
our rules.  In light of this we request comment on retaining future use of
this band by Part 15 equipment.  Possibilities include eliminating this band
from Part 15 use in order to avoid any potential conflicts with future
licensed services, maintaining Part 15 use of this band and also implementing
licensed services, or maintaining Part 15 use of this band while limiting
licensed use of the band.  

     We request further comment on other suggestions received for use of the
2402- 2417 MHz band, including providing licensed services in this band that
are subject to technical rules that are similar to the rules for unlicensed
Part 15 devices, or use of the band for MSS.  MSS providers appear
pessimistic regarding the utility 2402-2417 MHz for MSS.  However,
Loral/Qualcomm states that it is continuing to evaluate the possibility of
providing MSS in this band.  

     Both the 2390-2400 MHz and 2402-2417 MHz bands are currently available
for secondary use by the amateur service.  The Reconciliation Act directed
the Department of Commerce to seek to avoid excessive disruption of the
amateur service and to determine the extent to which, in general, commercial
users could share the frequency with amateur radio licensees.  The Department
identified spectrum for transfer in light of this directive, and concluded
that these two bands could be made available for commercial use without
severely affecting the amateur service.  However, in their comments, the
amateur service community argues that the Department failed to meet the
criteria of the Reconciliation Act.  We recognize the importance of the
amateur service and, in making our allocation decisions, we will take into
account existing use of the spectrum by the amateur service.  We therefore
solicit information on several options.  One approach for accommodating
amateur service use of these bands is to maintain a secondary allocation for
the amateur service in all or part of this spectrum.  Another approach is to
make the amateur service the primary user in a portion of this spectrum while
either maintaining a secondary allocation in the remaining portions of the
bands or eliminating the other portions from the amateur service.  We also
solicit information on the degree of disruption to the Amateur service that
would result if all or part of this spectrum was removed from the amateur
service.  We request comment on these options, including the ability of
various radio services to share spectrum with the amateur service.  

     For the 4660-4685 MHz band, several parties representing broadcast
interests request that we allocate this band for broadcast auxiliary service
(BAS).  These parties state that broadcasters need additional spectrum to
meet increasing needs for auxiliary communications, especially electronic
news gathering.  They argue that existing BAS spectrum is already congested
and that advanced television and cable services will further increase demand.
We request comment on this proposal and in particular the extent to which
this band could accommodate both existing and new broadcast auxiliary
requirements.  

     Other suggestions for use of the 4660-4685 MHz band include spectrum for
fixed microwave systems that will be displaced from 1850-1990 MHz by PCS, MSS
feeder links and in-building voice and data systems.  We believe that the
issue of reaccommodating fixed microwave operations has been adequately
addressed in our proceeding on emerging technologies, so that is not
necessary to reallocate additional spectrum for this purpose.  Further, while
we recognize the importance of providing spectrum for MSS, including spectrum
for feeder links, we note that the Report of the MSS Above 1 GHz Negotiated
Rulemaking Committee, found that the existence of the FSS Allotment Plan for
the 4500-4800 MHz band raises significant regulatory and policy issues
regarding use of this band for feeder links.  With regard to the suggestion
that 4660-4685 MHz be used for in-building communications and some limited
outdoor use, we believe that such services can generally be accommodated in
spectrum allocated for use by unlicensed PCS devices.  We request comment on
our tentative conclusions regarding these alternative proposals.  

     We request comment on any other services that might be provided in these
three frequency bands.  Commenters should provide us with as much information
as possible with regard to how any proposed service provides benefit to the
public.  Commenters should also describe their proposed service in as much
detail as possible, including the most appropriate licensing areas,
limitations on eligibility, and any technical constraints or parameters that
should be imposed on use of these bands.  Commenters should recognize that
each band has slightly different circumstances that may affect its use and
should address these circumstances appropriately.  Commenters that support
identifying specific services for these bands should discuss why this
specificity is necessary and its impact upon future flexibility as technology
continues to advance and new services become available.  Parties should also
provide a cost/benefit analysis for their proposal, and compare their
proposal to other proposals under consideration.  Finally, parties should
discuss licensing mechanisms for the proposed service, including whether the
service meets the criteria for competitive bidding.  

                     IV.  PROCEDURAL MATTERS

Ex Parte Rules - Non-Restricted Proceeding

     This is a non-restricted notice and comment rule making proceeding.  Ex
parte presentations are permitted, except during the Sunshine Agenda period,
provided they are disclosed as provided in Commission rules.  See generally
47 C.F.R.   1.1202, 1.1203, and 1.1206(a).  

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

     The analysis required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5
U.S.C.  Section 608, is contained in Appendix E. 

Comment Dates

     Pursuant to applicable procedures set forth in Sections 1.415 and 1.419
of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.   1.415 and 1.419, interested parties
may file comments on or before December 19, 1994, and reply comments on or
before January 3, 1995.  To file formally in this proceeding, you must file
an original and four copies of all comments, reply comments, and supporting
comments.  If you want each Commissioner to receive a personal copy of your
comments, you must file an original plus nine copies.  You should send
comments and reply comments to Office of the Secretary, Federal
Communications Commission, Washington, DC 20554.  Comments and reply comments
will be available for public inspection during regular business hours in the
FCC Reference Center, Room 239, 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20554.  

Ordering Clause

     Authority for issuance of this Notice of Proposed Rule Making is
contained in Sections 4(i), 303(g), 303(r), 332(a), and 403 of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.   154(i), 303(g), 303(r),
332(a), and 403.  

Contact Person

     For further information concerning this proceeding, contact Steve
Sharkey, Office of Engineering and Technology, (202) 653-8151.  

                   FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

                   William F. Caton 
                   Acting Secretary 


                                Appendix A

                 NTIA Preliminary Spectrum Reallocation Plan

Bands Identified          Reallocation Status        Reallocation Schedule
for Reallocation

1390-1400 MHz             Exclusive                  January 1999
1427-1432 MHz             Exclusive                  January 1999*
1670-1675 MHz             Mixed                      January 1999**
1710-1755 MHz             Mixed                      January 2004
2300-2310 MHz             Exclusive                  January 1996
2390-2400 MHz             Exclusive                  Immediate
2402-2417 MHz             Exclusive                  Immediate
3650-3700 MHz             Mixed                      January 1999
4635-4660 MHz             Exclusive                  January 1997*
4660-4685 MHz             Exclusive                  Immediate

* Protection for a limited number of facilities would be required for an
additional period of time. 

** Limited immediate use of this spectrum would be considered.


                             Appendix B

Comments filed in Response to NOI in ET Docket No. 94-32

 1      Alcatel Network Systems, Inc.
 2      Amateur Television Network
 3      Amateur Radio Council of Arizona
 4      American Petroleum Institute
 5      American Mobile Satellite Corporation
 6      American Assoc.  of State Highway and Transportation Officials
 7      American Radio Relay League, Inc.
 8      Apple Computer, Inc.
 9      Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials-Inter 
10      Association for Maximum Service Television, inc.
11      AT&T Corp.
12      California Public-Safety Radio Association, Inc.
13      Coalition of Private users of Multimedia Technologies
14      Cornell University/National Astronomy and Ionosphere Center
15      County of Kern
16      County of Orange, California
17      E.  V.  Williams Co., Inc.
18      First Nations Development Institute
19      Forestry-Conservation Communications Association
20      GEC Plessey Semiconductors
21      GTE Service Corporation
22      Herb D.  Twitchell
23      Industrial Telecommunications Association, Inc.
24      Interdigital Communications Corp.
25      International Association of Chiefs of Police
26      Itron, Inc.
27      James W.  Tittle
28      John Eramo & Sons, Inc.
29      Ken Bellmard
30      King County, Washington
31      Leaco Rural Telephone Cooperative, Inc.
32      Loral/Qualcomm Partnership, L.P.
33      Major Cities Police Chiefs Association
34      Maricopa Adult Probation Department
35      Motorola, Inc.
36      National Communications System
37      National Association of Business and Educational Radio, Inc.
38      New York City Transit Police Department
39      North Carolina Smartnet User's Network
40      Northern Amateur Relay Council of California, Inc.
41      Pacific Bell and Nevada Bell
42      Part 15 Coalition
43      Radio Amateur Satellite Corporation
44      Robert L.  Greene
45      San Bernardino Microwave Society
46      Southern California Repeater and Remote Base Association
47      Southwestern Bell
48      Symbol Technologies, Inc.
49      Telecommunication Industry Association
50      The Critical Care Telemetry Group
51      The Southern Company
52      Utah VHF Society
53      Utilities Telecommunications Council
54      Valley Communications Center
55      Western Multiplex Corporation
56      Western States VHF-Microwave Society
57      William Burns

Late filed Comments in ET Docket 94-32

 1      Cactus Intertie System/Cactus Radio Club, Inc.
 2      City and County of Durham, North Carolina
 3      County of Tulare
 4      Florida Fruit & Vegetable Association
 5      Kent Britain
 6      Kerr-McGee Corporation
 7      Mitchell Energy & Development Corp.
 8      National Research Council
 9      National Propane Gas Association
10      National Utility Contractors Association
11      Phelps Sungas, Inc.
12      Pillsbury Company
13      Ready Mix Concrete Corporation
14      Rochester VHF Group
15      Sun Services Corporation
16      Superior Asphalt Company, Inc.
17      Vann Gin Co., Inc.
18      Visalia Fire Department
19      Webber Energy Fuels
20      Westbank Electric, Inc.


                              Appendix C

Reply Comments filed in ET Docket No.  94-32

 1.     Alcatel Network Systems
 2.     American Petroleum Institute
 3.     American Radio Relay League, Incorporated 
 4.     AT&T Corp.
 5.     Capital Cities/ABC Inc.
 6.     COMSAT Corporation
 7.     Industrial Telecommunications Association, Inc.
 8.     International Business Machines Corporation
 9.     Loral/Qualcomm Partnership, L.P.
10.     Metricom, Inc.
11.     National Association of Broadcasters
12.     National Broadcasting Company, Inc.
13.     National Association of Business and Educational Radio, Inc.
14.     Radio Amateur Satellite Corporation
15.     Southwestern Bell Corporation
16.     Western Multiplex Corporation

Late Filed Reply Comments filed in ET Docket No.  94-32

 1.     In-Flight Phone Corporation


                           Appendix D

      1.  In the NOI in this proceeding, we requested information on
potential services that could be accommodated in the 50 megahertz of spectrum
at 2390-2400 MHz, 2402-2417 MHz, and 4660-4685 MHz that the Department of
Commerce has identified for immediate reallocation.  In response to our NOI
we received 77 comments and 17 reply comments.  This appendix provides a
summary of these comments.  

     2.  2390-2400 MHz The 2390-2400 MHz band lies within the 2300-2450 MHz
frequency range, which is referred to as the 13 cm band by the amateur
service community.  The Department of Commerce has proposed reallocating 35
megahertz of spectrum, at 2300-2310 MHz, 2390-2400 MHz, and 2402-2417 MHz,
out of the total 70 megahertz of spectrum currently available for use by the
Amateur service in the 13 cm band.  This would leave 35 megahertz of spectrum
remaining available for use by Amateurs on a secondary basis to Government
operations.  Amateur service licensees contend that the Department of
Commerce erred in identifying frequencies in this range for reallocation
without accurately determining the effect that reallocation will have on the
Amateur service, or to what extent commercial users could share the
frequencies with the Amateur service.  These commenters dispute the
Department of Commerce's assertion that Amateur service spectrum requirements
can be satisfied by the 35 megahertz of spectrum that would remain allocated
for use by the Amateur service in the 13 cm band.  They state that the
reallocation will leave insufficient spectrum for Amateur Satellite
operations, will prevent full duplex point- to-point operations in the 13 cm
band, will eliminate weak signal operations carried out in this band, and
will crowd Amateur Service operations in the 13 cm band into the least
desirable spectrum near the center of the ISM band at 2450 MHz.  

     3.  Many Amateur Service commenters state that sharing between
commercial licensees and the Amateur Radio Service is not possible because,
unlike Government users which are generally located in remote areas,
commercial users are likely to be located in the same urban areas as Amateur
radio users.  Amateur service commenters also point out that the Commission
has used the continued availability to Amateurs of the 13 cm band to justify
reallocating Amateur spectrum in lower bands to commercial services and that
it would therefore be unjust for the Commission to now allocate this spectrum
for commercial uses.  Accordingly, these commenters request that the
frequencies reallocated from Federal Government use either be made available
for the primary use of the Amateur radio service or that displaced Amateur
Service users be accommodated in alternative bands.  

     4.  A number of comments were received by manufacturers of equipment
authorized under Part 15 of our Rules (Part 15 devices).  Although the
majority of these focused on the 2402-2417 MHz band, several parties
discussed the potential for use of the 2390-2400 MHz band for unlicensed
devices under Part 15 of the Rules or for licensed services subject to
technical rules similar to the Part 15 rules.  GEC Plessey suggests that the
entire 2390- 2417 MHz band be allocated for use by spread spectrum systems
that could support services such as wireless wide- area networks and
point-to-point services.  To provide compatibility between licensed and
unlicensed services, GEC Plessey and AT&T suggest that we adopt technical
rules for licensed services that are similar to the rules for unlicensed Part
15 devices.  However, Western Multiplex believes that restrictions stemming
from a need to protect space research operations in adjacent spectrum would
make it difficult to accommodate unlicensed operations in the 2390-2400 MHz
band.  Instead, Western Multiplex suggests that the 2390-2400 MHz band would
be best used to support private mobile and fixed operations, possibly to
fulfill some of the spectrum requirements described in the COPE petition.  

     5.  Pacific Bell and Nevada Bell (PB/NB) believe that while the
2390-2400 MHz band and the 2402-2417 MHz bands are too close to be paired and
used for full duplex operations, the two megahertz separating the bands also
makes it difficult to use them as a single band.  PB/NB therefore believe
that these bands would be best used for time division duplex operations to
provide in-building voice and data systems and some limited outdoor use. 
PB/NB notes the importance of paired operation for two way communication and,
noting that the 2300-2310 MHz and the 2390-2400 MHz bands are the only bands
identified in the Preliminary Report that can be easily paired, states that
it would be appropriate to delay licensing the 2390-2400 MHz in order to
allow it to be licensed with 2300-2310 MHz on a paired basis, possibly for
public safety services.  

     6.  Southwestern Bell also urges that the 2390-2400 MHz and the
2300-2310 MHz bands be paired.  It requests that these bands be allocated for
use by local exchange telephone companies to provide wireless local loop
service.  Southwestern Bell states that such a service could replace wired
local loops for providing basic telephone service and would facilitate the
introduction of new technologies such as remote meter reading and rapid
recovery systems for natural disasters.  

     7.  Leaco Rural Telephone Cooperative (Leaco) believes that the
Commission has neglected its duty to consider rural areas in allocating
spectrum for radio-based communications services and states that both the
2390- 2400 MHz and 2402-2417 MHz bands are suited to providing interactive
video, voice and data service in rural areas.  Several commenters also state
that services to rural areas would be enhanced by allocating all, or most of,
the 50 megahertz of spectrum for the exclusive use of Native Americans.  

     8.  Loral/Qualcomm and the American Mobile Satellite Corporation (AMSC)
are evaluating the possibility of using the 2390-2400 MHz band for the Mobile
Satellite Service (MSS).  AMSC states that, although the spectrum identified
for reallocation has "very limited utility for MSS," it is analyzing the
possible utility of the 2390- 2400 MHz band for MSS downlinks.  Further, in
its comments in response to our Notice of Inquiry in preparation for the 1995
World Radiocommunications Conference, AMSC states that the 2390-2400 MHz band
should be considered as a candidate for an MSS downlink allocation. 
Loral/Qualcomm cites the Commission's previous recognition of the potential
for the MSS service to stimulate economic growth as evidence of the relative
importance of MSS to the future telecommunications infrastructure, and urges
that the 2390-2400 MHz and 2402-2417 MHz bands be allocated for MSS uplinks. 
However, AMSC states that these bands would have no utility for providing MSS
uplinks because of interference from ISM devices and Part 15 equipment
operating in the 2400-2500 MHz band.  Motorola also urges consideration for
the possible use of this spectrum for MSS and COMSAT has filed reply comments
also supporting use of this spectrum for MSS.  

     9.  A number of comments were received in support of the Petition for
Rule Making from COPE.  In its comments, COPE requests that the 2390-2400 MHz
band be allocated for advanced private communications services.  The
Utilities Telecommunications Council (UTC), the Association of Public-Safety
Communications Officials (APCO), and the Forestry-Conservation Communications
Association filed separate comments expressing their belief that the
2390-2400 MHz band can be used to satisfy private emerging technology
spectrum requirements for advanced mobile or fixed communications.  The
Industrial Telecommunications Association, Inc.  (ITA) argues that the
2390-2400 MHz band is more suitable for private rather then commercial
systems because the area and intensity of use of privately operated systems
is generally more controlled than commercial systems and would be able to
accommodate any restrictions imposed due to Government operations in adjacent
bands.  On the other hand, a number of commenters believe that, because of
the existing non-Government use (e.g., amateur use), restrictions on
potential use, or the frequency range of the bands, none of the spectrum
being considered in this proceeding is suitable for use by private users for
emerging technologies.  

     10.  In late filed reply comments, In-Flight Phone Corporation
(In-Flight) seeks to have the 2390-2400 MHz band allocated for use by an
aeronautical audio/visual service (AAVS).  In-Flight states that AAVS would
be a ground-to-air service that would provide live multi-channel audio and
video programming for airline passengers.  In- Flight contends that the 10
megahertz of spectrum at 2390-2400 MHz could provide four channels of live
video and 18 channels of live audio entertainment to the average 1.36 million
people that fly on commercial aircraft each day.  

     11.  2402-2417 MHz The 2402-2417 MHz band also lies within the Amateur
service 13 cm band.  Amateur comments regarding reallocation of portions of
the 13 cm band have already been discussed in the preceding paragraphs, and
the points made with regard to reallocation of 2390-2400 MHz apply to this
band as well.  

     12.  Several manufacturers of Part 15 devices submitted comments
concerning this band, noting the variety and importance of devices developed
under Part 15.  The Part 15 Coalition points out that such devices include
"digital cordless telephones, electronic article surveillance equipment,
utility metering devices, fire and security alarm devices, wireless bar code
readers, airborne and marine collision avoidance systems, local area
networks..."  Other commenters note that the 2400-2500 MHz band is allocated
internationally for ISM use and that, consequently, Part 15 devices
manufactured in the United States can be marketed abroad, adding to the
international competitiveness of U.S.  companies.  Generally, the commenters
note that it was only recently that the Commission encouraged development of
spread spectrum systems in the 902-928 MHz, 2400-2483.5 MHz, and the
5700-5825 MHz bands and argued that the Commission should not now allocate
2402-2417 MHz for services that would be incompatible with continued Part 15
development and use of the 2400-2483.5 MHz band.  13.  There is some
disagreement, however, on what uses would be incompatible with Part 15 use of
the 2402-2417 MHz band.  Apple, Interdigital, the Part 15 Coalition, the
Southern Company, and Western Multiplex argue that any commercial licensed
service would be incompatible with Part 15 operation and that 2402-2417 MHz
should not, therefore, be considered for any licensed service.  Other
commenters, on the other hand, believe that Part 15 operations are compatible
with some licensed services.  Symbol Technologies states that spread spectrum
Part 15 devices are compatible with virtually all conventional narrowband
services.  GEC Plessey suggests that 2400-2402 MHz also be reallocated from
Federal Government to private sector use and that the entire 2390-2417 MHz
band then be allocated for use by spread spectrum systems that could support
services such as wireless wide- area networks, and point-to-point systems,
including telephony trunks.  To provide compatibility between licensed and
unlicensed services, GEC Plessey and AT&T would adopt technical rules for
licensed services that are similar to the rules for unlicensed Part 15
devices.  

     14.  PB/NB believes that the 2402-2417 MHz band would be best used for
time division duplex operations to provide in-building voice and data systems
and some limited outdoor use.  Loral/Qualcomm states that it is evaluating
the possibility of using 2402-2417 MHz for an MSS uplink.  AMSC, however,
believes that the noise generated by ISM equipment operating in this band
eliminates it consideration for MSS use, especially as an uplink.  

     15.  Parties that filed comments in support of allocating the 2390-2400
MHz band to meet the advanced communications needs of private radio users, as
described in the COPE petition, generally also supported allocating the
2402-2417 MHz band for this purpose.  APCO states that any difficulty in
using this band arising from noise from ISM devices could be overcome through
geographic limitations, higher power levels, or the use of spread spectrum
technology.  

     16.  4660-4685 MHz Alcatel Network Systems (Alcatel) believes that the
4660-4685 MHz band is suitable for non-Government use by the fixed microwave
service.  Alcatel contends, however, that an additional 75 megahertz of
spectrum is needed to meet the needs of fixed microwave users and that 100
megahertz of spectrum should be reallocated.  API, and the American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), believe
that this band should be allocated for the use of private fixed microwave
systems that will be displaced from the 1850-1990 MHz band by PCS.  The
Forestry-Conservation Communications Association, the National Association of
Business and Educational Radio, Inc.  (NABER), and Western Multiplex also
believe that private users can make some use of this band.  However, most
parties filing comments in support of the COPE petition regard the 4660-4685
MHz band as too high in the spectrum to meet the needs of private users for
advanced mobile services.  

     17.  As with the 2390-2400 MHz and 2402-2417 MHz bands, PB/NB believe
that the 4660-4685 MHz band would be best used for time division duplex
operations to provide in-building voice and data systems and possibly some
limited outdoor use.  Loral/Qualcomm suggests using the 4660-4685 MHz band
for MSS service links or feeder links, in either the space-to-Earth or
Earth-to-Space direction.  COMSAT supports using this band for non-
geostationary satellite system feeder links.  

     18.  The Association for Maximum Service Television (MSTV) believes that
the 4660-4685 MHz band would be appropriate for support of wideband advanced
digital video services and proposes that the band be allocated to terrestrial
fixed and mobile auxiliary broadcast operations.  MSTV states that increased
use of broadcast auxiliary services, particularly for mobile electronic news
gathering (ENG) operations, has resulted in congestion in the bands that are
currently available for such operations.  Further, MSTV asserts that demand
for broadcast auxiliary spectrum routinely surpasses the amount of spectrum
that is available, especially in major metropolitan areas.  MSTV argues that
the added spectrum requirements of advanced television (ATV) will result in
even greater spectrum congestion.  Accordingly, MSTV argues that the
4660-4685 MHz band should be allocated to meet the growing demands of the
broadcast auxiliary service.  MSTV's proposal is supported by Capital
Cities/ABC, Inc.  (ABC), the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB), and
the National Broadcasting Company, Inc.  (NBC).  and is opposed by the
American Petroleum Institute, and NABER.  

 
                        Appendix E

             INITIAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS
        
     1.  Reason for Action: The changes to Part 2 of the Commission's Rules
proposed herein are for use of the spectrum that is being reallocated from
Federal Government to non-Government use.  This reallocation of spectrum is
required by the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993.  

     2.  Objectives: The Commission seeks to allocate the spectrum for
services that present the greatest potential to provide benefit to the public
by providing for the introduction of new services and the enhancement of
existing services.  These new and enhanced services will create new jobs,
foster economic growth, and improve access to communications by industry and
the American public.  

     3.  Legal Basis: The legal basis for these rule changes is found in
Sections 4(i), 303(g), 303(r), and 332(a) of the Communications Act of 1934,
as amended, 47 U.S.C.   154(i), 303(g), 303(r), and 332(a).  

     4.  Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements: No
reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements are proposed in
this item.  

     5.  Federal Rules Which Overlap, Duplicate or Conflict With These Rules:
None. 

     6.  Description, Potential Impact, and Number of Small Entities
Involved: Many small entities could be positively affected by this proposal
because the allocations proposed will foster new technologies resulting in
new jobs, economic growth, and improved access to communications by industry,
including small entities.  The number of small entities that will be affected
is unknown.  

     7.  Any Significant Alternatives Minimizing the Impact on Small Entities
Consistent with the Stated Objectives: This Notice of Proposed Rule Making
solicits comments on a variety of alternatives.  Additionally, all
significant alternatives presented in response to the Notice of Inquiry in
this proceeding have been addressed in this Notice of Proposed Rule Making.  


                              Appendix F

A. Title 47 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 2, is proposed to be amended as
   follow: 

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


     1.  The authority citation for Part 2 continues to read as follows:

     Authority: Sec.  4, 302, 303, and 307 of the Communications Act of 1934,
as amended, 47 U.S.C.  Sections 154, 154(i), 30, 303, 303(r), and 307, unless
otherwise noted.  


     2.  Section 2.106 is amended by revising columns 4 through 7 of the
table for the frequencies 2390-2450 MHz and 4500-4800 MHz, revising footnote
G2, and adding new footnote G122, and to read as follows: 

* * * * *

      United States table                 FCC use designators

  Government      Non-Government    Rule part(s)   Special-use frequencies

 Allocation Mhz   Allocation Mhz  
      (4)              (5)             (6)                  (7)
   
   2390-2400        2390-2400        Amateur (97).
   G122             FIXED.
                    MOBILE.
                    Amateur.

   2400-2402        2400-2402        Amateur (97).
   RADIOLOCATION.   Amateur.
   664 752 G2       664 752

   2402-2417        2402-2417        Amateur (97).
   664 752 G122     FIXED.
                    MOBILE.
                    Amateur.
                    664 752

   2417-2450        2417-2450        Amateur (97).
   RADIOLOCATION.   Amateur.  
   664 752 G2       664 752

   * * *

   4500-4660        4500-4660   
   FIXED.           FIXED-SATELLITE 
   MOBILE.          (space-to-Earth).
   US245            792A S245
   
   4660-4685        4660-4685 MOBILE.  
   G122             FIXED.  
                    FIXED-SATELLITE 
                    (space-to-Earth).  
                    792A S245

   4685-4800        4685-4800 
   FIXED.           FIXED-SATELLITE 
   MOBILE.          (space-to-Earth).  
   US245            792A S245

   * * *

   G2 In the bands 216-225, 420-450 (except as provided by US 217), 890-902,
928-942, 1300-1400, 2300-2390, 2400-2402, 2417-2450, 2700-2900, 5650-5925,
and 9000-9200 MHz, the Government radiolocation is limited to the military
services.  

   * * *

   G122 The bands 2390-2400, 2402-2417 and 4660-4685 MHz were identified for
immediate reallocation, effective August 10, 1994, for exclusive
non-Government use under Title VI of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of
1993.  Effective August 10, 1994, any Government operations in these bands
are on a non-interference basis to authorized non-Government operations and
shall not hinder the implementation of any non-Government operations.  

   * * * * *

     By letter dated October 27, 1994, the President of the United States
notified the Chairman of the Commission that Federal Government frequency
assignments in these bands have been withdrawn and that the National Table of
Frequency Allocations has been modified to reflect the reallocation of these
bands.  

     Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, Pub.  L.  No.  103-66, 107
Stat.  312 (approved August 10, 1993). 

     See Reconciliation Act  6001(a)(3), as codified at 47 U.S.C.   923. 

     The President must withdraw the assignment to a Federal Government
station of any frequency recommended for immediate reallocation within 6
months of release of the preliminary report so that the spectrum is then
available for exclusive non-Federal use.  At least one-half of the 50
megahertz identified for immediate reallocation must be below 3 gigahertz and
all of it must be identified for exclusive non-Federal use.  

     Reconciliation Act  6001(a)(3), as codified at 47 U.S.C.   923(e)(2)(A). 

     Preliminary Spectrum Reallocation Report, U.S.  Department of Commerce,
NTIA Special Publication 94- 27, February, 1994. 

     Reconciliation Act  6001(a)(3), as codified at 47 U.S.C.   925(a). 

     Notice of Inquiry, 9 FCC Rcd 2175 (1994).

     In the Conference Report on the Reconciliation Act the Conferees
expressed their belief that low power biomedical telemetry devices may
improve the quality and decrease the cost of health care services and stated
that the NTIA and the FCC should consider the spectrum needs for such devices
in making allocation decisions pursuant to the Reconciliation Act.  In its
comments, however, the Critical Care Telemetry Group states that biomedical
telemetry devices must operate on frequencies below 1 GHz and that,
therefore, none of the spectrum under consideration in this proceeding is
appropriate for biomedical telemetry use.  Critical Care Telemetry Group
comments at 1-3.  

     See Appendices B and C.

     See 47 C.F.R.  2.104(b)(2) for a description of Region 2.

     See Table of Frequency Allocations, 47 C.F.R.   2.106.

     Preliminary Report, section 4 at 14-17.  

     See Table of Frequency Allocations, 47 C.F.R.   2.106.

     The Preliminary Report identified the 2400-2402 MHz band as being
currently used for the Amateur Satellite Service and, therefore, did not
identify this segment for reallocation.  Preliminary Report at 4-16.  

     See Table of Frequency Allocations, 47 C.F.R.   2.106.  See also 47
C.F.R.  Part 18. 

     Part 15 provides for operation of unlicensed low-power devices.  

     See Table of Frequency Allocations, 47 C.F.R.   2.106.  Use of the
fixed-satellite service (space-to-earth) at 4500-4800 MHz is subject to an
allotment plan contained at Appendix 30B of the international Radio
Regulations.  

     See Table of Frequency Allocations, 47 C.F.R.   2.106.  The
fixed-satellite service in this band is also subject to case-by-case
electromagnetic compatibility analyses.  See U.S.  allocation footnote 245.  

     See Sharing Arrangement Between the Department of Communications of
Canada and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration of
the United States Concerning the Use of the Band 4400-5000 MHz, signed August
29, 1986.  

     See generally Redevelopment of Spectrum to Encourage Innovation in the
Use of New Telecommunications Technologies, ET Docket No.  92-9, First Report
and Order and Third Notice of Proposed Rule Making, 7 FCC Rcd 6886 (1992),
Second Report and Order, 8 FCC Rcd 6495 (1993), Third Report and Order and
Memorandum Opinion and Order, 8 FCC Rcd 6589 (1993), Memorandum Opinion and
Order, 9 FCC Rcd 1943 (1994).  

     See generally Amendment of the Commission's Rules to Establish New
Personal Communications Services, GEN Docket No.  90-314, Memorandum Opinion
and Order, 9 FCC Rcd 5031 (1994).  

     See Amendment of Parts 2 and 22 of the Commission's Rules, 2 FCC Rcd
1825 (1986) (subsequent history omitted). 

     Section 309(j)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47
U.S.C.   309(j)(1), permits auctions only where mutually exclusive
applications for initial licenses or construction permits are accepted for
filing by the Commission and where the principal use of the spectrum will
involve or is reasonably likely to involve the receipt by the licensee of
compensation from subscribers in return for enabling those subscribers to
receive or transmit communications signals.  We also note that the
Commission's authority under Section 309(j) to use competitive bidding is
limited to awarding licenses and is not to be used for allocating spectrum.  

     See 47 C.F.R.   24.236.

     See comments of Cornell University and the National Research Council. 
These organizations stress the need for appropriate limits on use of the
2390-2400 and 2402-2417 MHz bands to protect highly sensitive radio astronomy
operations being carried out on 2380 MHz at the Arecibo Observatory in Puerto
Rico.  In particular, these parties stress the need to not permit
aeronautical or space-to-Earth use of the 2390-2400 MHz band, to restrict
terrestrial use in the vicinity of the Arecibo Observatory, and to limit
spurious emissions from equipment operating in these bands.  

     We made a commitment to seek additional spectrum for unlicensed PCS in
the PCS proceeding.  See Memorandum Opinion and Order, GEN Docket No. 
90-314, 9 FCC Rcd 5031 (1994).  

     MDS currently operates in the 2150-2160 MHz band nationwide.  This 10
megahertz provides one 6 megahertz wide channel and one 4 megahertz wide
channel.  In the top 50 markets, however, the 4 megahertz channel may be
combined with 2 megahertz at 2160-2162 MHz.  See 47 C.F.R.   21.901(c).  If
we were to allocate 6 megahertz from each of the 2300-2310 MHz and 2390-2400
MHz bands, we could fully reaccommodate MDS.  The remaining 4 megahertz in
each band could be used for other purposes.  As promised in the PCS
Reconsideration MO&O, supra n.  22, in the near future we will address in
separate proceedings the specific issue of providing additional spectrum for
unlicensed PCS and the mobile-satellite service. 

     Reconciliation Act  6001(a)(3), as codified at 47 U.S.C.  
923(c)(1)(C)(iii) and 923(c)(3)(C). 

     See generally, Second Report and Order, ET Docket No.  92-9, 8 FCC Rcd
6495 (1993), Third Report and Order, ET Docket No 92-9, 8 FCC Rcd 6589
(1993), and Memorandum Opinion and Order, ET Docket No.  92-9, 59 Fed Reg. 
19642 (4/25/94).  

     Report of the MSS Above 1 GHz Negotiated Rulemaking Committee, at 31.

     See Memorandum Opinion and Order, GEN Docket No.  90-314, 9 FCC Rcd 5031
(1994). 

     Whether a service does or does not meet the criteria for competitive
bidding will not be a factor in our allocation decision making process.  This
information will, however, assist us in judging the competitive nature of a
service for the purpose of proposing licensing and service rules.  We will
offer licenses through competitive bidding if a service meets the criteria
for doing so.  See Section 309(j)(2) of the Communication Act of 1934 , as
amended.  See also PP Docket No.  93-253.  

     Preliminary Report at Section 5.

     The remaining 35 megahertz of spectrum is at 2400-2402 MHz and 2417-2450
MHz. 

     Comments of Amateur Radio Council of Arizona at 2, American Radio Relay
League, Inc.  at 3-5, Northern Amateur Relay Council of California at 1-2,
San Bernardino Microwave Society at 3, Southern California Repeater and
Remote Base Association at 6-8 and 10-11, Utah VHF Society at 2, Cactus
Intertie System/Cactus Radio Club, Inc.  at 4- 5.  Sec.  113(c)(1)(C)(iii) of
the Reconciliation Act requires that, in identifying whether a band of
frequencies should be transferred to the private sector, the Department of
Commerce consider "excessive disruption of existing use of Federal
Frequencies by amateur radio licensees", and Sec.  113(c)(3)(C) states that
the Department of Commerce must analyze the, "extent to which, in general,
commercial users could share the frequency with amateur radio licensees."  

     See Generally, comments of Amateur Television Network, Amateur Radio
Council of Arizona, American Radio Relay League, Inc., Northern Amateur Relay
Council of California, San Bernardino Microwave Society, Southern California
Repeater and Remote Base Association, Utah VHF Society, and Radio Amateur
Satellite Corporation.  

     Amateur Television Network comments at 2; Amateur Radio Council comments
at 2; Northern Amateur Relay Council of California comments at 3-5; Southern
California Repeater and Remote Base Association comments at 8, 10- 11; and
Utah VHF Society comments at 2.  

     American Radio Relay League comments at 11-12; SCRRBA comments at 12;
and Cactus Intertie System/Cactus Radio Club comments at 5. 

     A number of commenters have suggested that the Department of Commerce
make available portions of the 2310- 2390 MHz band for use by the Amateur
Radio Service to accommodate displaced Amateur users or that the portions of
2300-2310 MHz band not be reallocated in exchange for spectrum above and
adjacent to 2417 MHz.  Reallocation of additional or alternative spectrum
must be addressed by the Department of Commerce and is outside the scope of
this proceeding.  We note, however, that in our August 9th report to the
Secretary of Commerce, FCC 94-213, we provided an analysis of comments
received in response to the Preliminary Report along with our own comments
and recommendations for consideration by the Department of Commerce for
incorporation in its final report.  

     GEC Plessey comments at 1-3.  GEC Plessey suggests that the 2400-2402
MHz band be included in the reallocation of spectrum.  Such a reallocation is
outside the scope of this proceeding.  

     GEC Plessey comments at 1-2, AT&T comments at 3-4.  

     Western Multiplex comments at 3-4.  Western Multiplex also provides a
band plan for the 2390-2400 MHz band.  The COPE petition is a Petition for
Rule Making, filed December 23, 1993, by the Coalition of Private Users of
Emerging Multimedia Technologies (COPE) that has been included for
consideration in this proceeding.  COPE is a group consisting of a broad
range of private land mobile users and user associations, such as the
American Petroleum Institute, the Association of Public-Safety Communication
Officials-International, Inc., the National Association of Business and
Educational Radio, Inc., and the Utilities Telecommunications Council.  In
its petition, COPE argues that a need exists for an allocation of 75
megahertz of spectrum below 3 GHz for the development of an "Advanced Private
Land Mobile Communications Service", which would accommodate the needs of
private land mobile radio user communities for new operations such as
advanced wireless imaging and decision processing/remote file access systems.
COPE specifically suggests that spectrum be reallocated from the Federal
Government, and it states that the most likely source of spectrum to
accommodate private emerging technology needs lies in the spectrum to be
reallocated under the requirements of the Reconciliation Act.  

     Time Division Duplex operations provide two-way communications by
transmitting in only a single direction at any moment in time.  This is
compared to Frequency Division Duplex where bands of frequencies that are
sufficiently separated are paired to allow simultaneous, bi-directional
communications.  

     Pacific Bell and Nevada Bell comments at 4.

     Pacific Bell and Nevada Bell comments at 2-3, 6.

     Southwestern Bell comments at 1-7.

     Leaco comments at 3-9.  Contrary to Leaco's contention that we have not
fulfilled our obligation to rural telephone companies, in adopting rules for
competitive bidding we have included these companies as designated entities
that receive bidding preferences.  See Generally, PP Docket No. 93-253.  

     Comments of First Nation Development Institute, Ken Ballard, and Robert
L. Greene.  These commenters do not, however, describe what services the
spectrum should be used for or how Native Americans would use the spectrum
outside of remote areas.  We decline to propose to set this spectrum aside
for exclusive use by Native Americans.  In our recent decision to auction
spectrum for PCS and IVDS we made specific provisions to assist minorities in
obtaining licenses.  See Generally, PP Docket No. 93-253.  If we find that
similar provisions are warranted in issuing licenses for spectrum reallocated
from the Federal Government we will take such action.  

     Loral/Qualcomm comments at 5, AMSC comments at 1-2.
     AMSC comments filed in response to the Notice of Inquiry, IC Docket No. 
94-31 at 15-16. 
     Loral/Qualcomm comments at 1-5.
     AMSC comments at 1-2.
     Motorola comments at 10.
     COMSAT reply comments at 1-2.
     COPE comments at 4-6.
     UTC comments at 6-7, APCO comments at 5-6, Forestry-Conservation
Communications Association comments at 2. 
     ITA comments at 4-7.

     Comments of California Public-Safety Radio Association at 3, County of
Orange, California at 2, International Association of Chiefs of Police at
4-7, King County, Washington at 1, Major Cities Police Chiefs Associations at
3, New York Transit Police Department at 1, Telecommunications Industry
Association at 5-6, Valley Communications Center at 1.  

     In-Flight reply comments at 8.
     Paras.  6-7, supra.
     Part 15 Coalition comments at 2.
     Apple Computer comments at 3; AT&T comments at 3; and GEC Plessey
comments at 2-3 

     In 1990, we encouraged the further development and implementation of the
"exciting new family of [spread spectrum] technologies" by modifying Part 15
of the Rules to maximize the flexibility of spread spectrum devices.  Spread
spectrum systems may operate with up to one watt of transmitter output power.
Report and Order, Gen.  Docket No, 89-354, 5 FCC Rcd 4123, 4124 (1990).  

     Apple comments at 1-3; Interdigital comments at 4; Part 15 Coalition
comments at 3-4; Southern Company comments at 6-7; Western Multiplex comments
at 5-7.  

     Symbol Technologies comments at 8-9.

     GEC Plessey believes that such terrestrial use would have a minimal
effect on Amateur Satellite operations at 2400-2402 MHz.  GEC Plessey
comments at 1-3.  

     GEC Plessey comments at 1-2, AT&T comments at 3-4.  
     Pacific Bell and Nevada Bell comments at 4.
     Loral/Qualcomm comments at 5.
     AMSC comments at 1-2.

     COPE comments at 4-6, UTC comments at 6-7, APCO comments at 5-6,
Forestry-Conservation Communications Association comments at 2. 

     APCO comments at 5-6.
     Alcatel comments at 1-3.
     API comments at 17.  ASSHTO comments at 3.

     Forestry-Conservation Communications Association comments at 1-2 and 5.  NABER at comments 16.  Western 
Multiplex comments at 7.

     Pacific Bell and Nevada Bell comments at 5.
     Loral/Qualcomm comments at 6.
     COMSAT reply comments at 2.
     MSTV comments at 6-7.

     MSTV also points out that allocating this band for auxiliary services
offers the potential for future expansion of broadcast auxiliary services in
the adjacent 4635-4660 MHz band, which was identified for reallocation in the
Preliminary Report and is to be available in 1997.  MSTV comments at 2-8.  

     Reply comments of ABC at 1-4, NAB at 1-4, NBC 1-4, API at 8-9, and NABER
at 4-5. 

