The FCC said Monday its NPRM for implementing the 2012 spectrum law's mandate for public safety to move off the 470-512 MHz T band by 2021 proposes “to issue licenses only where net winning bids would exceed the total estimated relocation costs for all public safety T-Band licensees subject to mandatory relocation.” Those costs are expected to total $5 billion-$6 billion, while GAO found last year revenue from a T-band spectrum sale would be unlikely to exceed $2 billion (see 1906210050). FCC Chairman Ajit Pai announced in May his circulation of the NPRM and simultaneously called for Congress to repeal the auction mandate (see 2005150053). The FCC seeks comment in docket 13-42 on its proposal for a licensing trigger and “on the statutory meaning of certain terms that will inform the likelihood that net winning bids will in fact exceed total estimated relocation costs.” The commission wants commenters to discuss “how to address any deficit in net winning bids -- should we require public safety licensees to relocate on a city-by-city basis if the bids for a particular urbanized area meet or exceed the cost estimates to relocate public safety licensees in that particular area? Similarly, should licensees be required to relocate on a channel-by-channel basis within urbanized areas where bids for that channel meet or exceed the cost of clearing the channel?” Comments are due 30 days after Federal Register publication, replies after 60 days. Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel supported the NPRM because she believes the rules mean “this auction is destined to fail” given proceeds “would need to be greater than the revenue raised from the FCC’s previous nationwide auctions” in the 24 GHz and the 28 GHz bands combined: The agency “does not have the authority to waive this statutory requirement, even if under present circumstances this auction is clearly not in the public interest.” Congressional “action that would stop this auction and allow public safety authorities to continue to communicate using the T-Band is the best way forward,” Rosenworcel said.

Groups asked the FCC to quickly approve additional rule changes proposed in a Further NPRM on the 6 GHz band (see 2006300042). Very-low power “devices with sufficient power to be fully functional will prove central to the entire 5G wireless ecosystem,” the Public Interest Spectrum Coalition filed in docket 18-295: “Widespread access everywhere to untethered, solar- or battery-powered VLP devices will facilitate not only Wi-Fi 6 networks, but will also make 5G mobile networks far more valuable.” New America’s Open Technology Institute, Public Knowledge, Consumer Reports and the Consumer Federation of America were among the groups on the filing.

CTA and others said the FCC should act quickly to make changes proposed in a Further NPRM on the 6 GHz band, approved 5-0 in April (see 2004230059). APCO and NAB were among those opposing the order, opposing further changes. CTIA urged caution. Comments were due Monday in docket 18-295 on proposals to permit very low-power devices to operate across the 6 GHz band and to increase the power at which low-power indoor access points may operate.

Three electricity associations support an Edison Electric Institute request for a stay, pending judicial review, of an April FCC order opening the 6 GHz band for unlicensed use (see 2004230059). “EEI is likely to prevail on the merits; utilities would suffer irreparable harm absent a stay, and other parties would not suffer immediate harm if the stay is granted,” said the American Public Power Association, National Rural Electric Cooperative Association and Utilities Technology Council in a filing posted Monday in docket 18-295. The Wi-Fi Alliance and NCTA opposed the stay, as did Apple and other tech companies (see here). “All of EEI’s arguments -- those it is likely to make to the Court and on which its Petition is premised -- rest on the baseless assertion that harmful interference will occur,” the alliance said: Objections “amount to little more than disagreement -- without facts --with the Commission’s decision.” NCTA said the commission “carefully analyzed an extensive technical record and correctly determined that ‘fixed microwave links will have an insignificant chance of experiencing harmful interference from indoor low-power unlicensed operations.’”

European regulators may not make decisions for another 10 years on the future of broadcast TV in the UHF band, speakers said Monday at conclusion of the virtual European Spectrum Management Conference. The FCC repurposed 84 MHz of UHF for wireless in a 2016-17 incentive auction. Such a swath in Europe remains hotly contested between carriers seeking low-band for 5G and broadcasters.

Verizon and CTIA asked the FCC to reconsider rules allowing unlicensed use of the 6 GHz band, in petitions posted Friday in docket 18-295. The rules approved 5-0 in April (see 2004230059) don’t allow power levels “sufficient to integrate wideband 6 GHz unlicensed operations into 5G systems,” Verizon said. Increase the maximum permitted effective isotropic radiated power (EIRP) in 5.925-6.425 and 6.525-6.875 sections from 36 to 42 dBm, with maximum conducted power limit of 36 dBm, Verizon said. CTIA asked to reconsider not clearing and licensing part of the band. The U.S. "faces a growing mid-band deficit, even accounting for the 350 megahertz in the 3.5 GHz and 3.7 GHz bands to be auctioned this year,” CTIA said: “The Commission recognizes that there is an urgent need for additional licensed mid-band spectrum, yet inexplicably decided to give to unlicensed the full 1,200 megahertz in the 6 GHz band.” CTIA supported Verizon calls for higher power levels and for licensing part of the spectrum. The Fixed Wireless Communications Coalition sought changes on “two discrete issues" where the group believes the commission erred. “Codify an average activity factor of 0.4% for low-power indoor devices,” FWCC asked: “Mandate testing prior to the release of unlicensed devices, including low-power indoor devices, in the 6 GHz band” or “delay the effective date of the rules to permit more time for testing.”

Two issues expected to be contentious at the 2023 World Radiocommunication Conference involve potential spectrum sharing in the 6 GHz and the UHF bands, speakers said Thursday at a European spectrum management conference. Agenda item (AI) 1.2 calls for identifying several bands, among them the 6425-7025 MHz band in Region 1, and the 7025-7125 MHz band globally, for mobile services. AI 1.5 considers potential sharing between users such as broadcasting services and mobile applications in the UHF 470-960 MHz band. Other keenly watched discussions include satellite and transport communications issues, they said. Agenda items are here.

The FCC remains concerned about receiver standards, Wireless Bureau Chief Donald Stockdale said at the virtual European Spectrum Management Conference Wednesday. Stockdale suggested the FCC do more to address the issue. Speakers on a second panel said Europe may not follow the U.S. in allocating the entire 6 GHz band for Wi-Fi and other unlicensed use, which the FCC did in April (see 2004230059).

Dedicating the lower 45 MHz of the 5.9 GHz band to Wi-Fi would be the “best course” for the spectrum, FCC Chairman Ajit Pai told a Broadband India Forum webinar Friday, per prepared remarks. Commissioner Mike O’Rielly predicts summer action (see 2004300032). In response to the pandemic, the FCC approved special temporary authority for more than 150 broadband providers to use the band, Pai said: They report “it has enabled faster speeds, increased coverage, and expanded network bandwidth. Collectively, they show the promise of the 5.9 GHz band for unlicensed use.” Pai highlighted the 6 GHz Further NPRM, which looks at use of very-low-power devices (see 2004230059): “We don’t really know what this would lead to. And that’s kind of the point with unlicensed innovation.”

ARRL asked the FCC to exercise caution in adopting new RF rules. The FCC logged more than 120 comments in docket 19-226 in the last two days, many from those concerned about the health effects of RF exposure. Others questioned the need for further regulation (see 2006170032). The comments respond to a December NPRM and were due Wednesday (see 1912040036).