STATEMENT OF
COMMISSIONER JESSICA ROSENWORCEL,
DISSENTING
Re: Promoting Investment in the 3550-3700 MHz Band, GN Docket No. 17-258; Petitions for 
Rulemaking Regarding the Citizens Broadband Radio Service, RM-11788 (Terminated), RM-
11789 (Terminated)
It is hard to overstate the audacity of United States spectrum policy.  Over history we have done 
the kooky and the unconventional.  We have seen the future and done it differently before anyone else.  In 
the process, we have changed the way that wireless systems are developed and distributed not just 
domestically—but worldwide.
After all, more than two decades ago we took the academic ideas of Ronald Coase and 
reimagined how we distribute our airwaves.  Instead of doling out specific licenses for specific uses based 
on political cues, we ushered in a new era of spectrum auctions—selling access to bidders and allowing 
them to use it however they choose.  It’s difficult to remember now, but these ideas were once mocked by 
experts, opposed by industry, and dismissed by policymakers.  However, in the rear-view mirror, they 
have been a resounding success.  The Commission has held more than 85 auctions, issued more than 
44,000 licenses and raised more than $140 billion in revenue.  As a result, our efforts have been a model 
for regulators worldwide.
We also pioneered the use of unlicensed spectrum.  We took a handful of underused frequencies 
known as “garbage bands” in the 900 MHz, 2.4 GHz, and 5.8 GHz bands and decided to test a new 
model.  Instead of dismissing these airwaves as junk we put in place a new model that set technical 
parameters and then did something radical—gave the public access to these airwaves.  This was edgy 
stuff.  It was a move away from command and control spectrum policy.  But this experiment was a wild 
success.  Because in time a standard was developed known as 802.11—and this is the spectrum where 
Wi-Fi was born.  
More recently, we blazed a trail for incentive auctions.  The two-sided broadcast incentive 
auction that the Commission just held was the first of its kind worldwide.  We tested the proposition that 
existing spectrum licensees might voluntarily relinquish their rights in exchange for a portion of the 
proceeds from the subsequent reauction of their airwaves for new flexible use.  And so far, so good—the 
auction concluded successfully earlier this year.  Regulators globally are taking note.  
The same audacity fueled our initial plans for the 3.5 GHz band.  But I fear that with today’s 
rulemaking this agency has lost its daring.  Instead of continuing in the innovative spirit of United States 
spectrum policy, we are in retreat.  We are slowing access to these airwaves and falling back on stale 
spectrum policy ideas that may have worked in the past but will by no means guarantee success in the 
future.   
The 3.5 GHz band framework the Commission put in place two years ago was creative.  Instead 
of relying on the traditional binary choice between licensed and unlicensed, the agency adopted an 
unprecedented three-tiered model for spectrum sharing and management.  Under this three-tiered system, 
incumbent government users have a primary and preemptive right.  But we know they do not need access 
all the time, everywhere, so we created a secondary license opportunity, custom-built for small cells.  
Then, to the extent the demand for licenses is limited, opportunistic use is permitted by rule.  To 
coordinate this grand effort, we proposed dynamic spectrum access systems.  
2Elements of this 3.5 GHz model remain in place.  But this rulemaking seeks to gut what was most 
visionary about this framework.  It seeks comment on extended license terms.  It asks about putting in 
place larger geographic licenses.  It offers up same-old, same-old instead of what could be creative and 
different.     
To put a finer point on it, this rulemaking takes what was most innovative about our existing 3.5 
GHz model and casts it aside in favor of existing business models.  This is short sighted.  The success of 
our future auctions depends on growing a new class of spectrum interests—who can innovate and join the 
ranks of those who bid on airwaves and support the Internet of Things.  This is important.  Because as our 
national providers grow bigger and fewer in number, the power of using auctions as a tool for distribution 
is compromised.  Simply put, we need more entities interested in opportunities in our airwaves.  
Moreover, our 3.5 GHz framework was ready to go.  Millions of dollars have been invested.  
More than 200 experimental authorizations have been granted.  Protocols regarding operations, 
interoperability, security, and device testing are well underway.  Product certification programs have 
already begun.  
All of that, however, stops short with this rulemaking.  We can hem and haw about how we are 
making changes to foster deployment, to increase investment, and speed the way to 5G.  I don’t buy it.  
We are impeding real progress.  We are betraying our hard-won spectrum tradition of leading the pack
and changing the paradigm.  I dissent.