Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of
Implementing a Nationwide, Broadband, 
Interoperable Public Safety Network in 
the 700 MHz Band
Development of Operational, Technical and 
Spectrum Requirements for Meeting Federal, State 
and Local Public Safety Communications 
Requirements Through the Year 2010
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
PS Docket No. 06-229
WT Docket No. 96-86
NINTH NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING
Adopted:  December 20, 2006 Released:  December 20, 2006
Comment Date: (45 days after date of publication in the Federal Register)
Reply Comment Date: (60 days after date of publication in the Federal Register)
By the Commission:  Chairman Martin, and Commissioners Copps, Adelstein, Tate and McDowell issuing   
separate statements.
I. INTRODUCTION
1. In the Commission’s Eighth Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the Commission sought 
comment on whether certain channels within the current 24 megahertz of public safety spectrum in the 
700 MHz band (764-776 MHz and 794-806 MHz) should be modified to accommodate broadband 
communications.1 The Commission stated that this action “is consistent with national priorities focusing 
on homeland security and broadband and our commitment to ensure that emergency first responders have 
access to reliable and interoperable communications.”2
2. As also noted in the Eighth NPRM, the Commission previously announced principles for 
ensuring effective public safety use of the 700 MHz band, including standardization necessary to achieve 
nationwide interoperability, development of competitive equipment markets, and a degree of regional 
flexibility necessary to allow opportunities for tailored approaches to meeting the needs of regional 
communities.3 The Commission also noted that Congress has recognized that the 700 MHz spectrum is 
“ideal” for providing first responders with interoperable communications channels, and established 
February 17, 2009 as the date by which this spectrum will be cleared of incumbent broadcasters.4  
  
1 See Development of Operational, Technical and Spectrum Requirements for Meeting Federal, State and Local 
Public Safety Communications Requirements Through the Year 2010, WT Docket No. 96-86, Eighth Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking, 21 FCC Rcd 3668 (2006) (Eighth NPRM).  “Broadband” refers to systems that may utilize a 
bandwidth of 1 megahertz or more.  Id. at 3670 n. 18.
2 Id. at 3669 ¶ 1.
3 See id. at 3669 ¶ 2.
4 See id.
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181 
2
Furthermore, the Commission found, in its Report to Congress submitted pursuant to the Intelligence 
Reform Act, that deployment of an integrated, nationwide, interoperable network capable of delivering 
broadband communications would offer the public safety community many benefits, including video 
surveillance, real-time text messaging and email, high resolution digital images and the ability to obtain 
location and status information of personnel and equipment in the field.5 We thus are presented with an 
opportunity to put into place a regulatory framework that would ensure the availability of effective 
spectrum in the 700 MHz band for interoperable, public safety use.
3. In this Ninth Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, we seek to expand and build upon the 
themes raised in the Eighth NPRM by proposing a comprehensive plan that we believe may best promote 
the rapid deployment of a nationwide, interoperable, broadband public safety network, and thereby 
improve emergency responsiveness.  Particularly in light of the nation’s current and anticipated public 
safety and homeland security needs, we propose a centralized and national approach to maximize public 
safety access to interoperable, broadband spectrum in the 700 MHz band, and, at the same time, foster 
and promote the development and deployment of advanced broadband applications, related radio 
technologies, and a modern, IP-based system architecture.
4. Our proposed plan is a departure from prior public safety allocations, and is designed to 
speed deployment, decrease costs of roll-out, promote nationwide interoperability and provide a source of 
funding for constructing a broadband public safety communications network.  The proposal includes that 
the Commission (1) allocate 12 megahertz of the 700 MHz public safety spectrum from wideband to 
broadband use; (2) assign this spectrum nationwide to a single national public safety broadband licensee; 
(3) permit the national public safety broadband licensee also to operate on a secondary basis on all other 
public safety spectrum in the 700 MHz band; (4) permit the licensee to use its assigned spectrum to 
provide public safety entities with public safety broadband service on a fee for service basis; (5) permit 
the licensee to provide unconditionally preemptible access to its assigned spectrum to commercial service 
providers on a secondary basis; (6) facilitate the shared use of commercial mobile radio service (CMRS)
infrastructure for the efficient provision of public safety broadband service; and (7) establish performance 
requirements for interoperability, build out, preemptibility of commercial access, and system robustness.
II. BACKGROUND
5. The current band plan for the public safety portion of the 700 MHz band provides 
narrowband (voice and low speed data) and wideband (image/high speed data and slow scan video) 
communications channels.  The allocation of the 700 MHz band between narrowband and wideband 
channels is depicted in Figure 1.  The four narrowband segments are 764-767 MHz (Channels 1-480), 
773-776 MHz (Channels 481-960), 794-797 MHz (Channels 961-1440) and 803-806 MHz (Channels 
1441-1920).6 Each 6 megahertz narrowband segment is divided into 480 channels with a channel size of 
6.25 kilohertz, which may be aggregated to 25 kilohertz.7 The two wideband segments are 767-773 MHz 
(Channels 1-120) and 797-803 MHz (Channels 121-240).8 Each 6 megahertz wideband segment is 
divided into 120 channels with a channel size of 50 kilohertz.9 Wideband channels may be aggregated to 
  
5 See Report to Congress on the Study to Assess the Short-Term and Long-Term Needs for Allocations of 
Additional Portions of the Electromagnetic Spectrum for Federal, State, and Local Emergency Response Providers, 
WT Docket No. 05-157 at 13 ¶ 26 (Dec. 16, 2005).
6 47 C.F.R. § 90.531(b).  
7 47 C.F.R. § 90.531(d)(1).  
8 47 C.F.R. § 90.531(c).  
9 Id.  
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181 
3
form 100 kilohertz or 150 kilohertz channels.10 By specifying a minimum channel size for narrowband 
and wideband communications, the Commission sought to address both the ability of Regional Planning 
Committees11 to combine these channels as needed and spectrum efficiency concerns.12
6. Within the narrowband and wideband channel segments the Commission included 
general use, interoperability and reserve spectrum.  The Commission designated 12.5 megahertz of 
spectrum for general use, which includes 7.7 megahertz for narrowband use and 4.8 megahertz for 
wideband.13 All wideband general use channels are designated for assignment to public safety eligibles 
subject to Commission-approved RPC plans.14 The Commission designated 2.6 megahertz of the 700 
  
10 47 C.F.R. §§ 90.531(c) and (d)(2).
11 A large portion of the 700 MHz public safety spectrum, approximately 53 percent (12.5 megahertz), is designated 
for general use by local, regional and state users.  A regional planning process was adopted to govern management 
of this public safety spectrum.  Regional Planning Committees (RPCs) are responsible for creating and managing 
regional plans.  Regional planning for the 700 MHz band was modeled after the Commission’s national plan for 
public safety regional planning channels in the 800 MHz band.  When the Commission established 700 MHz RPCs, 
the Commission based its decision largely on the success of 800 MHz RPCs in ensuring that public safety spectrum 
was fairly and efficiently put to its best, most appropriate, and most efficient use for public safety services.  See 
Development of Operational, Technical and Spectrum Requirements for Meeting Federal, State and Local Public 
Safety Agency Communications Requirements Through the Year 2010, WT Docket No. 96-86, First Report and 
Order and Third Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 14 FCC Rcd 152, 191 ¶ 78 (1998) (First Report and Order), aff’d,
Development of Operational, Technical and Spectrum Requirements for Meeting Federal, State and Local Public 
Safety Agency Communications Requirements Through the Year 2010, WT Docket 96-86, Second Memorandum 
Opinion & Order, 15 FCC Rcd 16844, 16872 ¶ 60 (2000) (Second MO&O).  The Commission requires that there be 
two separate and distinct regional plans, one for the 800 MHz band and one for the 700 MHz band.  
12 To ensure this spectrum is used efficiently, the Commission specified a “data rate per unit bandwidth” relative to 
the narrowband and wideband channels.  See First Report and Order, 14 FCC Rcd at 172-175 ¶¶ 36-41; Second 
MO&O, 15 FCC Rcd at 16855 ¶ 20 (affirming wideband data rate); 47 C.F.R. §§ 90.535(b) and (c).
13 47 C.F.R. §§ 90.531(b)(6) and (c)(3).  
14 47 C.F.R. § 90.531(c)(3).  
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181 
4
MHz public safety spectrum for nationwide interoperable communications, which consists of 0.8 
megahertz for narrowband interoperability and 1.8 megahertz for wideband interoperability.15  The 
Commission also designated 6 megahertz of public safety spectrum to be held in reserve, which consists 
of 0.6 megahertz for narrowband and 5.4 megahertz for wideband use.16 The Commission intended this 
reservation of 5.4 megahertz of wideband spectrum to accommodate future needs for narrowband, 
wideband or broadband that may be identified through the regional planning process or developments in 
technology.17 Figure 2 depicts the basic design of the wideband segments, which comprise 12 megahertz 
of the 700 MHz public safety band.18  
7. The Commission has made progress towards achieving nationwide interoperability in the 
700 MHz public safety band.  In 2000, the Public Safety National Coordination Committee19 (NCC) 
recommended that the Commission adopt Project 25 Phase I (Project 25) as the interoperability standard 
for the narrowband interoperability channels.20 Subsequently, the Commission adopted Project 25 as the 
  
15 47 C.F.R. §§ 90.531(b)(1) and (c)(1).
16 47 C.F.R. §§ 90.531(b)(2) and (c)(2).  
17 See Development of Operational, Technical and Spectrum Requirements for Meeting Federal, State and Local 
Public Safety Agency Communications Requirements Through the Year 2010, WT Docket 96-86, Third Report and 
Order and Third Memorandum Opinion and Order, 15 FCC Rcd 19844, 19874 ¶ 69 (2000).  
18 See Development of Operational, Technical and Spectrum Requirements for Meeting Federal, State and Local 
Public Safety Agency Communications Requirements Through the Year 2010, WT Docket 96-86, Fourth 
Memorandum Opinion and Order, 17 FCC Rcd 4736, Appendix D (2002).  The numbers in the wideband portion 
indicate the number of channels.
19 The NCC was a federal advisory committee established by the Commission in 1999 to advise the Commission on 
operational and technical parameters for use of the 700 MHz public safety band.  The NCC’s charter expired on July 
25, 2003.
20 See Public Safety National Coordination Committee, Recommendations to the Federal Communications 
Commission for Technical and Operational Standards for Use of the 764-776 MHz and 794-806 MHz Public Safety 
Band Pending Development of Final Rules, at 17 ¶ 54 (Feb. 25, 2000).
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181 
5
narrowband digital standard for the interoperability channels.21 As a result, mobile and portable 
narrowband radios are required to be capable of operating on the interoperability channels using the 
Project 25 standard, ensuring that all public safety entities using 700 MHz narrowband radios will be able 
to communicate with each other.22  Thus, the Commission and the public safety community are poised to 
move forward with nationwide interoperability on the narrowband channels, once this spectrum is cleared 
of incumbent broadcasters.
8. In 2003, the NCC recommended that the Commission adopt the 700 MHz wideband 
standard known as Scalable Adaptive Modulation (SAM) for the wideband interoperability standard.23
The SAM standard was developed by industry consensus in cooperation with the Telecommunications 
Industry Association (TIA).  In the Seventh NPRM, the Commission sought comment on its tentative 
conclusion to adopt the SAM standard as the interoperability standard for the 700 MHz wideband 
interoperability channels and to require all wideband radios be capable of operating on the wideband 
interoperability channels using SAM.24
9. After the close of the comment period, several parties submitted ex parte proposals 
asking the Commission to step back from its efforts to complete work on wideband interoperability and 
instead consider whether changes could be made that would allow use of broadband technologies in the 
700 MHz public safety band.  For example, the Coalition for Wideband Data Deployment requested the 
Commission to revisit the band plan to provide for broadband channels.25  The National Association of 
Regional Planning Committees requested that the Commission permit aggregation above 150 kilohertz in 
the wideband spectrum to permit both wideband and broadband applications.26  In addition, the National 
Public Safety Telecommunications Council (NPSTC) stated that the Commission should not alter the 700 
MHz narrowband allocation, but should explore how the wideband and reserved channels could be used 
to promote broadband access.27
10. The Eighth NPRM sought comment on whether certain channels within the current 24 
megahertz of public safety spectrum in the 700 MHz public safety band (764-776 MHz and 794-806 
MHz) should be modified to accommodate broadband communications, and if so, how.  The Eighth 
NPRM sought comment on specific proposals to accommodate broadband, submitted by the NPSTC, 
Motorola, Inc., and Lucent Technologies, Inc.  The Commission also asked commenters to update the 
  
21 See Development of Operational, Technical and Spectrum Requirements for Meeting Federal, State and Local 
Public Safety Agency Communications Requirements Through the Year 2010, WT Docket No. 96-86, Fourth 
Report and Order and Fifth Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 16 FCC Rcd 2020  (2001); 47 C.F.R. § 90.548.
22 See 47 C.F.R. §§ 90.547(a), 90.548.  
23 See letter from Kathleen Wallman, Chair, National Coordination Committee, to Michael Powell, Chairman, 
Federal Communications Commission, WT Docket 96-86 at 2 (July 25, 2003).
24 See Development of Operational, Technical and Spectrum Requirements for Meeting Federal, State and Local 
Public Safety Agency Communications Requirements Through the Year 2010, WT Docket 96-86, Fifth 
Memorandum Opinion and Order, Sixth Report and Order, and Seventh Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 20 FCC 
Rcd 831, 851-53 ¶¶ 49-50 (2005) (Seventh NPRM). 
25 See ex parte letter from Elizabeth R. Sachs, Esq., to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Federal Communications 
Commission at 15 (Nov. 30, 2005).  
26 See ex parte letter from William Carter to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Federal Communications Commission at 
3 (Oct. 13, 2005).
27 See ex parte letter from Vincent R. Stile, Chair, NPSTC, to Michael J. Wilhelm, Chief, Public Safety and Critical 
Infrastructure Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, WT Docket 
Nos. 96-86 and 05-157 at 1 (Nov. 18, 2005). 
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181 
6
record regarding wideband interoperability and the SAM standard.
III. DISCUSSION
11. We believe that the time may have come for a significant departure from the typical 
public safety allocation model the Commission has used in the past.  In prior allocations for public safety, 
individual public safety jurisdictions have been able to apply for and utilize individual licenses.  The 
Commission also has permitted public safety regional planning committees to develop plans for 
frequency coordination on a regional basis.  While this system has had significant benefits for public 
safety users, in terms of permitting them to deploy voice and narrowband facilities suitable for their 
needs, the system also has resulted in uneven build-out across the country in different bands, 
balkanization of spectrum between large numbers of incompatible systems, and interoperability 
difficulties if not inabilities.  In developing our proposal, we are guided by the following objectives for 
public safety communications in the twenty-first century.
A. Objectives of Public Safety Model
12. Broadband.  Presently, there is no allocation in the 700 MHz public safety band for 
broadband communications.  Broadband technologies hold the potential to provide public safety entities 
integrated access to voice and high-speed data capabilities, and thus may dramatically reduce the time it 
takes to access information during emergencies.  We believe that we should maximize opportunities for 
broadband use of 700 MHz spectrum due to the many benefits of broadband communications, including 
video surveillance, real-time text messaging and email, high resolution digital images and the ability to 
obtain location and status information of personnel and equipment in the field.  For example, police 
officers could exchange mug shots, fingerprints, photographic identification, and enforcement records; 
firefighters could have access to floor and building plans and real-time medical information; forensic 
experts could provide high resolution photographs of crime scenes and real-time video monitoring 
transmitted to incident command centers.
13. Nationwide Interoperability.  All emergency personnel involved in an incident need to be 
able to communicate seamlessly.  The availability of a nationwide, interoperable, broadband 
communications network for public safety substantially could enhance the ability of public safety entities 
to respond to emergency situations, whether due to severe weather events or criminal or terrorist 
activities, and likely would save lives and preserve property.  Yet, only 2.6 megahertz is designated for 
nationwide interoperable communications in the 700 MHz public safety band. Furthermore, the radios 
used by federal, state and local first responders generally are not interoperable. Instead, the highly 
fragmented structure of public safety agencies, whether among different public safety agencies serving 
the same community (i.e., local police, fire, emergency medical), neighboring communities or states, or 
among local, state, and federal levels, has resulted in many different and distinct communications 
infrastructures.  As a consequence, public safety personnel often must carry multiple radios to coordinate 
their activities. Even when some interoperability is reached on a regional level,28 there still is a lack of 
nationwide interoperability.
14. Adequate Funding. Any proposal for improving public safety communications should 
address potential new sources of funding.  Traditionally, public safety agencies have had great difficulty 
funding the build-out and operation of modern communications systems.  None of the other objectives of 
a public safety communications system can be met without adequate funding. 
  
28 See supra note 11.  
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181 
7
15. Cost Effectiveness. Public safety services should be provided at the least cost given the 
characteristics, e.g., capacity, reliability and coverage, of services provided. Economies of scale and 
scope in production and competition in supply are important in achieving cost effectiveness.  Also of 
importance is the ability to continually evolve technologically and incorporate new capabilities, while 
preserving backward compatibility and interoperability with subscriber units in the field.
16. Efficient Spectrum Use.  Public safety communications systems should be spectrum-
efficient.  Public safety services should use spectrum efficient technologies that appropriately reflect the 
value of spectrum.  For example, public safety providers could increase capacity through improvements in 
infrastructure when it is less costly than adding spectrum.  The high spectrum efficiency observed in the 
production of CMRS could be a benchmark for public safety. 
17. Robustness. Survivability is an important objective of the envisioned nationwide public 
safety broadband system.  The widespread destruction caused by Hurricane Katrina illustrated the 
vulnerability of the terrestrial communications infrastructure to natural disasters, as well as similarly 
destructive terrorist attacks.  When a disaster destroys the terrestrial infrastructure, public safety workers 
can be left without any communications. The system could be inherently robust by incorporating flexible
routing and other features (possibly including a satellite component operating in other spectrum) that will 
maintain essential operations when parts of the infrastructure have been destroyed or disabled.
18. Flexible Modern Architecture. A public safety communications network employing 
modern IP-based wireless system architecture may have many advantages in terms of flexibility, cost and 
compatibility with the existing IP-based networks.  An IP-based broadband wireless public safety system 
also readily could be integrated with legacy public safety and other wireless non-IP systems.  IP-based 
architecture provides great flexibility in combining multiple services, e.g. voice, data and video, on a 
common infrastructure and into the same device.
B. Proposal
19. We propose that the 12 megahertz of spectrum at 767-773 MHz and 797-803 MHz,
currently designated as wideband segments, be allocated for broadband use and that a single, national 
public safety broadband licensee be assigned this spectrum on a primary basis.  The licensee also would 
be authorized to use all other public safety spectrum in the 700 MHz band on a secondary basis.  Using 
this spectrum, the licensee would be authorized to provide public safety agencies voluntary access to 
broadband services, on a fee-for-service basis.  The licensee also would be permitted to provide 
unconditionally preemptible access to this spectrum to commercial entities through leases or in the form 
of public/private partnerships.  The national public safety broadband licensee may enter into arrangements 
with commercial service providers for accessing or sharing their communications systems infrastructure 
in order to create the nationwide, interoperable, broadband public safety communications network.  We 
would leave significant discretion to the national licensee to carry out its responsibilities.  We believe, 
however, that it would be necessary for the Commission to establish certain baseline performance 
requirements, including those for broadband, interoperability, build-out of national coverage, 
unconditional preemption of commercial use, and disaster restoration capability.  We seek comment 
broadly on our proposed approach or any alternatives, as well as any potential impact on existing 
operations or planning activities by public safety in this spectrum.
1. Single National Public Safety License
20. A central theme of our proposal is the licensing of a single, national public safety entity 
for the provision of public safety broadband service in lieu of the traditional practice of licensing 
individual state and local jurisdictions. We believe that centralizing the licensee responsibilities into a 
single entity representative of the public safety community could best serve the objectives discussed 
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181 
8
above. A centralized, national network providing a wide range of communications services on a 
broadband backbone, using a flexible, modern architecture, could (1) enable nationwide interoperability; 
(2) reduce costs; (3) increase efficiency of spectrum usage; and (4) enhance network robustness. 
21. Interoperability.  A national public safety licensee may be in the best position to solve the 
interoperability and broadband capacity problems that have been the topic of increased concern, 
especially apparent in the wake of 9/11 and last year’s hurricanes. A single, national network could 
provide a nationwide level of interoperability not achievable by an otherwise fragmented approach.  A 
centralized approach also could ensure a single technical framework for system implementation that could 
be designed, for example, to provide adequate capacity for new high-bandwidth uses including real-time 
mobile video.
22. Cost effectiveness.  A national system also by its very nature may be more cost-effective 
than any collection of individual systems.  Planning a public safety broadband network on a national level 
could achieve certain economies of scale, including in production and competition in supply of network 
and radio equipment.  In this regard, we would expect that economical, state-of-the-art, “off-the-shelf” 
technology particularly suitable for broadband use more rapidly could be made available to the public 
safety community.  Logically, a national public safety licensee could benefit from the same kinds of 
economies that have led to the evolution of nationwide CMRS systems as a way to improve their own 
cost-effectiveness in a highly competitive environment.
23. Further cost savings may be possible through the envisioned shared use of infrastructure 
between public safety and commercial uses. Having a single, national licensee could create significant 
purchasing power in acquiring equipment and services needed for the nationwide broadband public safety 
system.  A single national licensee may expedite (and reduce the cost of) decisions on technology and 
other standards that will be needed to ensure nationwide interoperability.  
24. Our proposal is aimed at facilitating the introduction of broadband technology that is able 
cost effectively to combine voice, data and video traffic on a common system.  A unified public safety 
communications system could reduce cost and increase capacity by using the spectrum more efficiently.  
Combining spectrum into a single system could serve the same number of users with less spectrum and 
hence lower cost because of greater efficiency in sharing spectrum among users. With fragmented 
systems, spectrum may be idle on one system while another system in the same area has reached capacity. 
25. Efficient use of spectrum.  A broadband system that combines different kinds of public 
safety traffic with different peak demands (e.g., the peak demand for voice, data and video may occur at 
different times) could require less spectrum overall than if different services are accommodated on 
multiple, specialized or narrowband systems.  Similar spectrum efficiency gains are possible by 
multiplexing a larger number of users on the same system and by combining users with different periods 
of peak traffic, as may be generally true with public safety and commercial traffic. Broadband technology 
could be the key to such improvements in spectrum efficiency, and our proposal is aimed at facilitating 
the rapid, nationwide deployment of broadband technology for public safety use.29  
26. Robustness and survivability.  Finally, a single national licensee may be in a better 
position to ensure robustness and survivability, especially when large geographic areas are affected that 
cut across traditional public safety jurisdictions.  A national licensee also may be in a uniquely 
  
29 See J. M. Peha, “How America’s Fragmented Approach to Public Safety Wastes Spectrum and Funding, Proc. 
Telecommunications Policy Research Conference, Sept. 2005, www.ece.cmu.edu/~peha/safety.html (assigning
spectrum to a unified national system would provide additional capacity to enhance public safety communications, 
and likely could do so at lower cost than dividing spectrum up among the many existing public safety systems).
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181 
9
advantageous position to efficiently stockpile equipment and transportable infrastructure that could be 
deployed quickly to disaster areas as needed.  It also could be well-situated to contract for national 
satellite service and benefit from economies of scale in integrating satellite capability into its radios to the 
extent that such integration is beneficial.
2. Selection of the National Licensee 
27. We envision that the national licensee would have many important responsibilities, 
including the design and implementation, build-out, and maintenance of the nationwide network, 
coordination of use by eligible local, state, and federal public safety agencies, and leasing excess capacity 
on an unconditional, preemptible basis to commercial users, including the discretion to terminate such 
commercial use when the interest of public safety so demands.  As a consequence, we propose that 
selection of the national public safety broadband licensee should be based on a number of criteria, 
including experience with public safety frequency coordination, not-for-profit status, and ability to 
directly represent all public safety interests.  We also propose that no commercial interest may be held in 
the national license or licensee, and that no commercial interest may participate in the management of the 
national licensee.  We seek comment on these and any other criteria that would be appropriate to ensure 
that the national licensee is able and qualified to adequately address the needs of all public safety users.
3. Funding Options  
28. We believe that the national public safety licensee should be able to charge fees for the 
use of its services. Such fees could serve the public interest in a number of ways.  First, they could serve 
as a source of funding for the build-out, maintenance and continued operation of the system.  Second, 
they could provide incentives for the efficient and fair use of the spectrum.  Not only should public safety 
entities that make heavy use of the spectrum in all fairness pay relatively higher usage fees, but an 
appropriately designed system of usage fees could facilitate the allocation of broadband capacity to 
highest value uses.  For example, absent a usage-based fee system for the broadband wireless service, a 
public safety entity might choose to distribute a non-time-sensitive or low priority video via the wireless 
network, rather than employing alternatives not dependent on spectrum availability, such as by a wireline 
network or by DVD media.  Usage fees could help decentralize decision-making about priorities of 
delivering broadband content over the public safety network, as opposed to reliance on administrative 
rules that may not necessarily comport with efficiency and fair use, e.g., a rule that would state that live 
video always has priority over recorded video.  We seek comment on the use of fees and other means for 
funding and promoting the efficient network usage.
29. Fees derived from secondary, unconditionally preemptible commercial use of spectrum 
assigned to the national public safety broadband licensee (as discussed more fully below) could provide 
an additional source of funding for the buildout of a nationwide public safety system.  Such additional 
funding, coupled with the potential cost savings of shared use of CMRS infrastructure, could allow a 
more rapid and extensive buildout of a broadband public safety system than could be achieved under 
traditional licensing and funding mechanisms.  The prospect of a single, efficient and interoperable 
broadband public safety system also may facilitate a more focused and effective use of scarce funds 
available through more traditional federal and state funding mechanisms, especially given the high 
national priority of effective, interoperable public safety communications during major disasters. 
30. Acquiring broadband service on a fee-for-service basis also may pose less of a financial 
burden for local jurisdictions, especially smaller ones, which may find it easier to budget for annual usage 
fees than to raise large amounts of upfront capital to construct individual systems.  Comments are invited 
on the viability and adequacy of these funding sources and suggestions for others.
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181 
10
4. Requirements of the National Public Safety Network
31. Broadband Communications. We seek comment on how the national licensee can best 
implement a broadband network that maximizes the inherent advantages of broadband communications.  
We do not intend, however, for our proposals herein to preclude our consideration of alternative band 
plans for the Upper 700 MHz Guard Band spectrum, including the rearrangement of the channels within 
the public safety allocation.30  
32. System Architecture.  Modern IP-based system architecture has many advantages in terms 
of flexibility and cost.  It could enable multiple technologies – narrowband terrestrial, broadband 
terrestrial and satellite – to be integrated.  This could permit the joint use of a common infrastructure by 
commercial and public safety users, with priority for public safety users.  It could provide great flexibility 
in combining multiple services, e.g., voice, data and video, into the same device.  It could allow the public 
safety system to benefit from economies of scale in the production of commercial devices.31 On the other 
hand, there may be issues as to whether IP technology can provide the required quality-of-service 
guarantees for certain public safety applications that must operate with a high degree of reliability in life-
threatening situations.  Should the national public safety licensee have the discretion to choose the best 
system architecture, or should the Commission establish system architecture requirements, and, if so, 
what should they be? 
33. Nationwide Interoperability.  Under our proposal, the national licensee would be required 
to construct a network that would provide interoperability for all devices operating on the national 
broadband public safety network. In addition, should we require that all public safety systems have the 
ability to interoperate with the national broadband system at a network level using IP-based methods?  
Should we require the national broadband licensee to provide any degree of physical layer (radio) 
interoperability with certain legacy systems, such as through the use of software defined radio or other 
technologies?  What would be the cost and benefits of such additional interoperability requirements? We 
seek comment on these and other interoperability requirements.
34. We also seek comment on whether federal law enforcement and other federal users such 
as the Department of Defense should be permitted to use the national broadband public safety broadband 
communications system and, if so, on what basis.  Federal users may find subscribing to a nationwide,
broadband public safety system to be a cost-effective alternative or complement to the construction of 
separate systems.  Joint use of a common infrastructure by federal, state and local public safety agencies 
also could facilitate interoperability and coordination between those sectors.
35. Network Build-Out.  We seek comment on appropriate timing and scope of build-out 
requirements for the national broadband public safety system.  In order to expedite the availability of 
ubiquitous coverage, we believe that the national licensee should issue requests for proposals for the 
construction of the national network by third parties.  While the network service specifications would 
remain the domain of the national licensee, the core infrastructure needed for the public safety network 
may be able to leverage the efforts of commercial service providers.  We expect, for example, that the 
mobile and portable devices for the public safety network could incorporate commercial, off-the-shelf 
  
30 See Former Nextel Communications, Inc. Upper 700 MHz Guard Band Licenses and Revisions to Part 27 of the 
Commission’s Rules; Development of Operational, Technical and Spectrum Requirements for Meeting Federal, 
State and Local Public Safety Communications Requirements Through the Year 2010, WT Docket Nos. 06-169, 96-
86, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 06-133 at ¶¶ 42-48 (rel. Sept. 8, 2006).
31 See Philip J. Weiser, “Clearing the Air: Convergence and the Safety Enterprise,” The Aspen Institute, 
Communications and Society Program (2006), p. 6, http://www.aspeninstitute.org/atf/cf/%7bDEB6F227-659B-
4EC8-8F84-8DF23CA704F5%7d/C&S%20FINALAIRSREP06.PDF. 
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181 
11
chipsets that could be integrated into hardware that meets the increased ruggedness and reliability 
standards of public safety users.  The nationwide, interoperable, broadband communications network also 
could leverage existing commercial network siting and infrastructure to lower build-out costs, by using 
existing towers, backhaul facilities, and, potentially, switches and routers.  We believe this framework 
may result in substantial economies of scale and scope that provide significant cost savings when 
compared to the costs of individual localities and agencies funding network development and deployment.  
We seek comment on this approach, including how we can ensure that the public safety network reaches 
rural and underdeveloped areas of the country.
36. Network Resiliency and Disaster Restoration. Public safety communications should be 
robust against destruction of terrestrial infrastructure.  This may require that the national public safety 
network proposed herein incorporate one or more of the following: IP-based routing, a satellite 
component (via arrangements with satellite providers), and temporary base stations (on the ground and in 
aircraft) that can be deployed in emergencies.  We seek comment on what requirements, if any, the 
Commission should establish for network resiliency and disaster restoration and how any such 
requirements should be specified.  Should some robustness requirements be imposed on all public safety 
systems, not just the national public safety system?
37. As noted above, having the nationwide broadband public safety license reside in a single, 
national public safety licensee may best serve the objectives of the public safety communications network 
proposed herein. To address or meet particular local needs, however, we also seek comment on how 
much discretion the national public safety licensee should permit subscribing local public safety entities, 
consistent with the standard technical criteria governing use of the nationwide network established by the 
national public safety licensee and consistent with the baseline performance requirements specified 
above.
5. Secondary Operations in Public Safety Spectrum in the 700 MHz Band
38. Under our proposal, the national public safety broadband licensee would be permitted to 
operate on a secondary basis on the remaining 12 megahertz of public safety spectrum in the 700 MHz 
band, i.e., the narrowband channels.  By secondary we mean that the national public safety licensee (1) 
may not interfere with primary use; (2) must immediately remedy any interference it causes to primary 
uses at its own expense (or shut down the interfering use); and (3) must accept any interference it receives 
from primary uses that are operating in accord with their licenses. One way to ensure that existing uses 
are not impacted may be through the employment of advanced technologies, such as cognitive radios. 
39. We believe that permitting the national licensee to use narrowband public safety 
spectrum in the 700 MHz band on a secondary basis significantly could increase the amount of spectrum 
available for broadband public safety use.  Such secondary use also could provide a migration path for a 
gradual transition to the nationwide, interoperable, broadband public safety communications system from 
legacy narrowband systems. We anticipate that the national system can integrate voice and data 
capabilities into a single broadband communications network.
40. Secondary use of public safety narrowband spectrum in the 700 MHz band offers yet 
another potential means for improved spectrum efficiency.  Present narrowband systems and patterns of 
use inevitably create unused and largely unusable time and frequency slots, i.e., spectrum “white space” 
in these bands.  Broadband cognitive radio technology, possibly employing OFDM or similar advanced 
waveforms, may be able to dynamically and efficiently exploit these unused spectrum fragments and 
aggregate them into a valuable “virtual” broadband spectrum resource for the benefit of public safety 
uses.  Importantly, it could do this without interfering with, or in anyway reducing the value or flexibility 
of, the primary narrowband use.  New technology with these capabilities currently is being developed and 
could be available within the timeframe anticipated for the build-out of the envisioned national public 
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181 
12
safety system.32 Creating a nationwide public safety licensee with secondary access to the 700 MHz 
narrowband public safety spectrum may establish an important additional market for such technology and 
help achieve economies of scale.  Also, a national licensee representing the broad interests of the public 
safety community at large may be able to enlist the support and cooperation of narrowband users to 
facilitate secondary access in ways that otherwise would not be possible.
6. Unconditionally Preemptible Access to Commercial Service Providers and 
Joint Provision with Commercial Services
41. Under our proposal, the national public safety licensee would be permitted to lease access 
to commercial service providers on an unconditionally preemptible basis and enter into spectrum lease 
arrangements with commercial service providers in the manner of a public/private partnership for joint 
provision of public safety and commercial services.  A key element of permitting commercial service is a 
strict requirement that any commercial use be unconditionally preemptible by the national public safety 
licensee.  Specifically, commercial users would be on plain notice that their use may be, without notice, 
subject to immediate termination at the sole discretion of the national public safety licensee.  We propose 
that there would be no conditions placed on the national licensee prior to making a determination to cease 
secondary commercial use.  The national public safety licensee would have the unfettered right, which 
cannot be compromised or contracted away, to unilaterally determine when a secondary commercial use 
must be discontinued in the interests of public safety.  Clearly, then, commercial users would need to 
ensure that, as part of any business plan, they have spectrum or communications alternatives in place to 
anticipate the event that their use may be preempted.  We also envision, however, that our dedication to 
creating a nationwide, interoperable, broadband public safety network could incent accelerated 
development and use of advanced technologies, such as cognitive radios, by both public safety users as 
well as secondary commercial users.  We seek comment on our proposal to permit commercial use on an 
unconditional preemptible basis as described above.
42. We believe that preemptible use by commercial service providers could have a number of 
benefits.  First, all of the economies of scale noted above that could be achieved for public safety by the 
implementation of a centralized, national communications network would apply equally to commercial 
users.  For example, the provision of public safety and commercial services over a common network 
infrastructure could act as an incentive to ensure more extensive coverage than may ordinarily be 
experienced with construction of a commercial-only network.  Cell sites established in particularly remote 
or rural areas to ensure nationwide coverage of the public safety network also could serve the secondary 
spectrum use needs of commercial providers.  Second, permitting unconditional, preemptible commercial 
use could maximize efficient use of public safety spectrum we propose for nationwide, interoperable, 
broadband public safety use.  Third, allowing interruptible commercial use of public safety spectrum may 
offer a potential new source of funding.  
43. Negotiating and managing such arrangements may be facilitated by the creation of a 
single nationwide public safety licensee. We envision that mutually satisfactory agreements between the 
national public safety licensee and the commercial users could result in like-kind exchanges, direct 
payments to the national public safety licensee, or some combination of both.  For example, a commercial 
service provider could enter into an arrangement whereby it permits the use by the national public safety 
licensee of its communications network infrastructure in exchange for having a secondary source of 
  
32 Software defined radio and cognitive radio technologies likely are to be important enabling technologies for 
efficient secondary use of public safety spectrum by the national licensee.  See SDR Forum, Public Safety Special 
Interest Group, Software Defined Radio Technology for Public Safety (Apr. 14, 2006), 
http://www.sdrforum.org/uploads/pub_36302706_a_0001_v_0_00_public_safety_04_14_06.pdf. 
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181 
13
spectrum to meet its communications needs.  We particularly are interested in the prospects for 
public/private partnerships to overcome the traditional funding problems associated with creation of 
large-scale public safety communications networks.  Specifically, we seek comment on whether 
opportunities exist for our nation’s public safety community to leverage the expected build-out of 700 
MHz communications systems by CMRS providers, as well as the existing national communications 
infrastructure such as towers, backhaul communications links, and power supplies.
44. Related Legal Matters.  Under the Commission’s current secondary markets rules, public 
safety licensees may lease their spectrum usage rights only to other public safety entities and entities 
providing communications in support of public safety operations.  The Commission determined based on 
the record then before it that public safety licensees should not be permitted to enter into spectrum leasing 
arrangements for commercial or other non-public safety operations.33 Consistent with the reasons 
explained above for why we believe it would be advantageous to permit commercial use on an 
unconditionally interruptible basis, we propose that we should amend the Commission’s spectrum leasing 
rules to permit the national public safety licensee to enter into spectrum leasing arrangements with 
commercial entities. We seek comment on this proposal.  In addition, commenters may want to address 
whether the current standard in the general leasing context for determining what constitutes a transfer of 
control is appropriate for the proposed leasing arrangements.
45. When adopting the spectrum leasing rules applicable to public safety licensees, the 
Commission contemplated the potential application of smart or opportunistic technological developments, 
such as cognitive radios, that could enable “interruptible” spectrum leasing arrangements.34 Indeed, in a 
subsequent Report and Order, the Commission described technical methods that a cognitive radio could 
use to enable interruptible secondary use of licensed spectrum by other parties.35 We seek comment on 
the potential use of technologies, such as cognitive radios, in connection with our proposal to enable the 
national public safety licensee to lease spectrum for commercial use.
46. We also note that Section 337(a)(1) of the Communications Act requires that the 700 
MHz public safety spectrum be allocated for “public safety services,” and Section 337(f) defines “public 
safety services” as follows:
(f) Definitions. For purposes of this section:
 (1) Public safety services. The term “public safety services” means services –
 (A) the sole or principal purpose of which is to protect the safety of life, health, or 
property;
 (B) that are provided –
 (i) by State or local government entities; or
 (ii) by nongovernmental organizations that are authorized by a governmental entity 
whose primary mission is the provision of such services; and
 (C) that are not made commercially available to the public by the provider.
In light of this statutory provision – particularly subparagraph (f)(1)(C) – we seek comment on whether it 
would be necessary, in order to allow the commercial use of this spectrum on an unconditionally 
  
33 See Promoting Efficient Use of Spectrum Through Elimination of Barriers to the Development of Secondary 
Markets, WT Docket No. 00-230, Second Report and Order, Order on Reconsideration, and Second Further Notice 
of Proposed Rulemaking, 19 FCC Rcd 17503, 17529-31 ¶¶ 53-56 (2004).  
34 Id. at 17531 ¶ 56; see also id. at 17546-53 ¶¶ 86-99.  
35 See Facilitating Opportunities for Flexible, Efficient, and Reliable Spectrum Use Employing Cognitive Radio 
Technologies, ET Docket No. 03-108, Report and Order, 20 FCC Rcd 5486, 5514-16 ¶¶ 80-90 (2005).
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181 
14
preemptible, secondary basis, to make a specific allocation for such secondary use in the 700 MHz public 
safety band and then issue a separate license to the national licensee for purposes of offering such use of 
the network on this basis.  If these measures are not statutorily required, we propose to incorporate 
directly into the national public safety license a license term permitting such commercial use.  While we 
consider the proposal to comport with all statutory requirements, we welcome comment on the issue of 
whether our proposal is generally consistent with Section 337.
IV. PROCEDURAL MATTERS
A. Ex Parte
47. This proceeding shall be treated as a “permit-but-disclose” proceeding in accordance with 
the Commission’s ex parte rules.36  Persons making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that 
memoranda summarizing the presentations must contain summaries of the substance of the presentations 
and not merely a listing of the subjects discussed.  More than a one- or two-sentence description of the 
views and arguments presented is generally required.37 Other rules pertaining to oral and written 
presentations are set forth in Section 1.1206(b) of the Commission’s rules as well.
B. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
48. Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),38 the Commission has prepared an 
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on small 
entities by the proposals considered in this Notice.  The text of the IRFA is set forth in the Appendix.  
Written public comments are requested on this IRFA.  Comments must be filed in accordance with the 
same filing deadlines for comments on the Notice, and they should have a separate and distinct heading 
designating them as responses to the IRFA.  The Commission will send a copy of the Notice, including 
the IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.39
C. Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis
49. This document does not contain proposed information collection(s) subject to the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain 
any new or modified “information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 
employees,” pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 
U.S.C. § 3506(c)(4).
D. Comment Filing Procedures
50. Pursuant to Sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission’s rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.415, 
1.419, interested parties may file comments and reply comments on or before the dates indicated on the 
first page of this document.  Comments may be filed using: (1) the Commission’s Electronic Comment 
Filing System (ECFS), (2) the Federal Government’s eRulemaking Portal, or (3) by filing paper copies.  
See Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 Fed. Reg. 24,121 (1998).
  
36 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1200, 1.1206; Amendment of 47 C.F.R. § 1.1200 et seq. Concerning Ex Parte Presentations in 
Commission Proceedings, GC Docket No. 95-21, Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 7348 (1997).
37 47 C.F.R. § 1.1206(b)(2).
38 See 5 U.S.C. § 603. The RFA 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).
39 5 U.S.C. § 603(a).
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181 
15
· Electronic Filers:  Comments may be filed electronically using the Internet by accessing the 
ECFS:  http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs or the Federal eRulemaking Portal:  
http://www.regulations.gov.  Filers should follow the instructions provided on the website for 
submitting comments.  
o For ECFS filers, if multiple dockets or rulemaking numbers appear in the caption of 
this proceeding, filers must transmit one electronic copy of the comments for each 
docket or rulemaking number referenced in the caption.  In completing the transmittal 
screen, filers should include their full name, U.S. Postal Service mailing address, and 
the applicable docket or rulemaking number.  Parties may also submit an electronic 
comment by Internet e-mail.  To get filing instructions, filers should send and e-mail 
to ecfs@fcc.gov, and include the following words in the body of the message, “get 
form.” A sample form and directions will be sent in response.
· Paper Filers:  Parties who choose to file by paper must file an original and four copies of each 
filing.  If more than one docket or rulemaking number appears in the caption of this 
proceeding, filers must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or rulemaking 
number.  
Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or by 
first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail (although we continue to experience delays 
in receiving U.S. Postal Service mail).  All filings must be addressed to the Commission’s 
Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.  
o The Commission’s contractor will receive hand-delivered or messenger-delivered 
paper filings for the Commission’s Secretary at 236 Massachusetts Avenue, N.E., 
Suite 110, Washington, DC 20002.  The filing hours at this location are 8:00 a.m. to 
7:00 p.m.  All hand deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners.  
Any envelopes must be disposed of before entering the building.  
o Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority 
Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743.  
o U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail must be addressed to 445 
12th Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20554.
51. Comments and reply comments and any other filed documents in this matter may be 
obtained from Best Copy and Printing, Inc., in person at 445 12th Street, S.W., Room CY-B402, 
Washington, DC 20554, via telephone at (202) 488-5300, via facsimile at (202) 488-5563, or via e-mail at 
FCC@BCPIWEB.COM.  The pleadings will be also available for public inspection and copying during 
regular business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Room CY-A257, 445 12th Street, S.W., 
Washington, DC 20554, and through the Commission’s Electronic Filing System (ECFS) accessible on 
the Commission’s Web site, http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs.
52. 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).
53. Commenters who file information that they believe is should be withheld from public 
inspection may request confidential treatment pursuant to Section 0.459 of the Commission’s rules.  
Commenters should file both their original comments for which they request confidentiality and redacted 
comments, along with their request for confidential treatment.  Commenters should not file proprietary 
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181 
16
information electronically.  See Examination of Current Policy Concerning the Treatment of Confidential 
Information Submitted to the Commission, Report and Order, 13 FCC Rcd 24816 (1998), Order on 
Reconsideration, 14 FCC Rcd 20128 (1999).  Even if the Commission grants confidential treatment, 
information that does not fall within a specific exemption pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act 
(FOIA) must be publicly disclosed pursuant to an appropriate request.  See 47 C.F.R. § 0.461; 5 U.S.C. § 
552.  We note that the Commission may grant requests for confidential treatment either conditionally or 
unconditionally.  As such, we note that the Commission has the discretion to release information on 
public interest grounds that does fall within the scope of a FOIA exemption.
V. ORDERING CLAUSES
54. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that pursuant to sections 1, 2, 4(i), 5(c), 7, 10, 201, 202, 
208, 301, 302, 303, 307, 308, 309, 310, 314, 316, 319, 324, 332, 333, 337 and 403 of the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 151, 152, 154(i), 155(c), 157, 160, 201, 202, 
208, 301, 302, 303, 307, 308, 309, 310, 314, 316, 319, 324, 332, 333, 337 and 403, this NINTH NOTICE 
OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING is hereby ADOPTED.
55. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to applicable procedures set forth in Sections 
1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission’s Rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file 
comments on the NINTH NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING on or before 45 days after 
publication in the Federal Register, and reply comments on or before 60 days after publication in the 
Federal Register.
56. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission’s Consumer and Governmental 
Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, SHALL SEND a copy of this Notice, including the Initial 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Marlene H. Dortch
Secretary
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181 
17
APPENDIX
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
1. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),40 the Commission has prepared this 
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) regarding the possible significant economic impact of the 
policies and rules proposed in this Ninth Notice of Proposed Rule Making (Notice) on a substantial 
number of small entities. Written public comments are requested regarding this IRFA.  Comments must 
be identified as responses to this IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines for comments identified in the 
Notice.  The Commission will send a copy of this Notice, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.41 In addition, this Notice and IRFA (or summaries 
thereof) will be published in the Federal Register.42
A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules
2. This Notice seeks to promote homeland security, and to advance the Commission’s 
commitment to ensure that emergency first responders have access to reliable, interoperable and 
broadband communications.  To place this Notice in context we briefly review the history of the 700 MHz 
public safety spectrum.  Pursuant to Congressional directive, the Commission reallocated 24 megahertz of 
spectrum in the Upper 700 MHz Band to meet the communications needs of public safety.43 In many 
areas of the United States this public safety spectrum is encumbered by incumbent television stations.44  
In January 1999 the Commission chartered a federal advisory committee, the Public Safety National 
Coordination Committee (NCC), to advise the Commission on service rules for the 700 MHz Public 
Safety Band, which the Commission had divided into narrowband voice and data channels and wideband 
data channels, with designated interoperability channels in each of these band segments.  In March 2006, 
the Commission adopted an Eighth NPRM in which it sought comment on whether certain channels 
within the current 24 megahertz of public safety spectrum in the 700 MHz public safety band (764-776 
MHz and 794-806 MHz) should be modified to accommodate broadband communications, and if so, how.  
The Eighth NPRM sought comment on specific proposals to accommodate broadband, submitted by the 
National Public Safety Telecommunications Council, Motorola, Inc., and Lucent Technologies, Inc.  The 
Commission also asked commenters to update the record regarding wideband interoperability and the 
SAM standard.  This Notice is another step in the Commission’s ongoing efforts to develop a regulatory 
framework in which to meet current and future public safety communications needs.
3. In this Notice, we seek comment on a proposal that the Commission (1) allocate 12 
megahertz of  the 700 MHz public safety spectrum from wideband to broadband use; (2) assign this 
spectrum nationwide to a single national public safety broadband licensee; (3) permit the national public 
safety broadband licensee also to operate on a secondary basis on all other public safety spectrum in the 
700 MHz band; (4) permit the licensee to provide unconditionally preemptible access to commercial 
  
40 See 5 U.S.C. § 603. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. §§ 601-612, has been amended by the Small Business Regulatory 
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), Pub. L. No. 104-121, Title II, 110 Stat. 857 (1996).
41 See 5 U.S.C. § 603(a).
42 See id.
43 See 47 U.S.C. § 337(a)(1); Reallocation of Television Channels 60-69, the 746-806 MHz Band, ET Docket No. 
97-157, Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 22953 (1997).
44 Pursuant to the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, Congress has established February 17, 2009, as the deadline for the 
end of the Digital Television transition.  Thereafter, use of the 700 MHz Public Safety band will not be affected by 
incumbent television broadcasters. 
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181 
18
service providers; (5) facilitate the shared use of CMRS infrastructure for the efficient provision of public 
safety broadband service; (6) permit the licensee to charge fees for use of its system; and (7) establish 
performance requirements for interoperability, build out, preemptibility of commercial access, and system 
robustness.  This Notice seeks to promote effective public safety communications and innovation in 
wireless services in support of public safety and homeland security
4. Consistent with national priorities focusing on homeland security and broadband, and the 
Commission’s commitment to ensure that emergency first responders have access to reliable and 
interoperable communications, this Notice will allow the Commission to compile a record in an effort to 
determine whether there is a need for changes to the current 700 MHz public safety band plan.  The 
Notice is intended to explore whether, particularly in light of the nation’s current and anticipated public 
safety and homeland security needs, a centralized and national approach would maximize public safety 
access to interoperable, broadband spectrum in the 700 MHz band, and, at the same time, foster and 
promote the development and deployment of advanced broadband applications, related radio 
technologies, and a modern, IP-based system architecture.  At the same time, the Notice also seeks to 
provide public safety entities with a cost effective and spectrally efficient communications system.   
B. Legal Basis
5. The authority for the action proposed in this rulemaking is contained in Sections 1, 2, 
4(i), 5(c), 7, 10, 201, 202, 208, 301, 302, 303, 307, 308, 309, 310, 314, 316, 319, 324, 332, 333, 337and 
403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 151, 152, 154(i), 155(c), 157, 160, 
201, 202, 208, 301, 302, 303, 307, 308, 309, 310, 314, 316, 319, 324, 332, 333, 337 and 403.
C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the Proposed 
Rules Will Apply
6. 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 proposed rules, if adopted.45 The RFA generally 
defines the term “small entity” as having the same meaning as the terms “small business,” “small 
organization,” and “small governmental jurisdiction.”46 In addition, the term “small business” has the 
same meaning as the term “small business concern” under the Small Business Act.47 A “small business 
concern” is one which: (1) is independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of 
operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business Administration 
(SBA).48
7. Governmental Entities. The term “small governmental jurisdiction” is defined as 
“governments of cities, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special districts, with a population 
of less than fifty thousand.”49 As of 2002, there were approximately 87,525 governmental jurisdictions in 
  
45 5 U.S.C. § 603(b)(3).
46 5 U.S.C. § 601(6).
47 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.”
48 15 U.S.C. § 632.
49 5 U.S.C. § 601(5).
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181 
19
the United States.50 This number includes 38,967 county governments, municipalities, and townships, of 
which 37,373 (approximately 95.9%) have populations of fewer than 50,000, and of which 1,594 have 
populations of 50,000 or more.  Thus, we estimate the number of small governmental jurisdictions overall 
to be 85,931 or fewer.
8. Public Safety Radio Licensees. As a general matter, public safety radio licensees include 
police, fire, local government, forestry conservation, highway maintenance, and emergency medical 
services.51 The SBA rules contain a definition for cellular and other wireless telecommunications 
companies which encompass business entities engaged in wireless communications employing no more 
than 1,500 persons.52 According to Census Bureau data for 2002, in this category there was a total of 
8,863 firms that operated for the entire year.53 Of this total, 401 firms had 100 or more employees, and 
the remainder had fewer than 100 employees.54 With respect to local governments, in particular, since 
many governmental entities as well as private businesses comprise the licensees for these services, we 
include under public safety services the number of government entities affected.
9. Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturers. The SBA has established a small 
business size standard for radio and television broadcasting and wireless communications equipment 
manufacturing.  Under the standard, firms are considered small if they have 1000 or fewer employees.55  
Census Bureau data for 1997 indicates that, for that year, there were a total of 1,215 establishments56 in 
this category.57 Of those, there were 1,150 that had employment under 500, and an additional 37 that had 
  
50 U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of the United States:  2006, Section 8, pages 272-273, Tables 415 and 
417.
51 See subparts A and B of Part 90 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 90.1-90.22.  Police licensees include 
26,608 licensees that serve state, county, and municipal enforcement through telephony (voice), telegraphy (code), 
and teletype and facsimile (printed material).  Fire licensees include 22,677 licensees comprised of private volunteer 
or professional fire companies, as well as units under governmental control. Public Safety Radio Pool licensees also 
include 40,512 licensees that are state, county, or municipal entities that use radio for official purposes. There are 
also 7,325 forestry service licensees comprised of licensees from state departments of conservation and private 
forest organizations that set up communications networks among fire lookout towers and ground crews.  The 9,480 
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 (1,460) 
use these channels for emergency medical service communications related to the delivery of emergency medical 
treatment. Another 19,478 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.
52 See 13 C.F.R. § 121.201 (NAICS code 517212); U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census, Subject Series: 
Information, “Employment Size of Establishments for the United States:  2002,” Table 2, NAICS code 517212.
53 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census, Subject Series: Information, “Employment Size of Establishments
for the United States:  2002,” Table 2, NAICS code 517212.
54 Id.
55 13 C.F.R. § 121.201, NAICS code 334220.
56 The number of “establishments” is a less helpful indicator of small business prevalence in this context than would 
be the number of “firms” or “companies,” because the latter take into account the concept of common ownership or 
control. Any single physical location for an entity is an establishment, even though that location may be owned by a 
different establishment. Thus, the number given may reflect inflated numbers of businesses in this category, 
including the numbers of small businesses. In this category, the Census break-out data for firms or companies only 
gives the total number of such entities for 1997, which were 1,089.
57 U.S. Census Bureau, 1997 Economic Census, Industry Series: Manufacturing, “Industry Statistics by Employment 
Size,” Table 4, NAICS code 334220.
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181 
20
employment of 500 to 999.58 The Commission estimates that the majority of wireless communications 
equipment manufacturers are small businesses.59
D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other Compliance 
Requirements
10. This Notice seeks comment on possible revisions to the 700 MHz public safety band that 
may modify reporting, recordkeeping and other compliance requirements.  The Commission requests 
comment on proposals to apply its Secondary Markets leasing regime to a national public safety licensee.  
Application of secondary markets leasing to the 700 MHz public safety band would require a 
modification of current reporting and recordkeeping requirements.  
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 reaching its proposed 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 or reporting requirements under the rule for 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 small 
entities.60
12. Generally, the Commission’s primary objective in issuing the Notice is to maximize 
public safety access to interoperable, broadband spectrum in the 700 MHz band and, at the same time, 
foster and promote the development and deployment of advanced broadband applications, related radio 
technologies, and a modern, IP-based system architecture.  To assist the Commission in its analysis, 
commenters are requested to provide information regarding which public safety entities and 
manufacturers would be affected by the proposed changes to the 700 MHz public safety band plan as 
described in this Notice.  In particular, we seek estimates of how many small entities might be affected 
and whether any of the proposals under consideration would be too burdensome to public safety.  
13. In the Notice, we seek data demonstrating the costs and benefits of modifying the 700 
MHz band to accommodate a nationwide, broadband, interoperable public safety communications 
network.  Pursuant to the proposed plan, a single nationwide public safety licensee would be selected to 
hold a single nationwide license for 12 megahertz of public safety spectrum.  The national licensee then 
would make this spectrum available for broadband, interoperable public safety operations, as well as in 
the 700 MHz narrowband spectrum on a secondary basis.  Furthermore, the national licensee would be 
able to lease excess capacity in these bands to commercial entities on an unconditionally preemptible 
basis.  The Notice asks commenters to identify the criteria for selection of a national public safety 
licensee, how the national licensee can best implement a broadband, interoperable network, the amount of 
discretion the national licensee should be afforded in designing the best system architecture, how to 
ensure nationwide build-out, and the appropriate degree of network resiliency and disaster restoration 
  
58 Census Bureau information for 2002 indicates that there were 1,041 establishments in this category.  See U.S. 
Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census, Subject Series: Manufacturing, “Industry Statistics for Industry Groups and 
Industries: 2002,” Table 2, (issued October 2005) NAICS code 334220. However, the 2002 Census data does not 
specify employment size information for establishments in this category.
59 We note, however that major providers of 700 MHz equipment, Motorola and M/A-COM Private Radio Systems, 
Inc., are not considered small businesses.
60 See 5 U.S.C. § 603(c).
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181 
21
capabilities for this public safety network.  The Notice also explores funding options, including the 
imposition of usage fees charged to public safety users as well as commercial users.  Accordingly, we 
seek comment on the costs and benefits of modifying the existing rules to accommodate deployment of a 
broadband, interoperable public safety network as proposed. 
14. With regard to alternatives, we do not anticipate that any of the proposals under 
consideration in this Notice would impose any additional economic burdens on public safety entities.  We 
believe our proposals will provide a resource for public safety entities to utilize a more cost-effective and 
spectrally efficient communications system to address their homeland security and emergency response 
needs.  Indeed, one of the major objectives underlying this proposal is to minimize economic burdens on 
public safety entities.  Because we do not anticipate that our proposal will impose additional economic 
burdens on public safety, and is in fact designed to reduce economic burdens on public safety, we see no 
reason to propose alternatives to accomplish our objectives.  However, we remain open to discussing 
alternatives to reaching our objectives should an alternative be stated in comments for the specific 
purpose of minimizing the impact on public safety entities.  Accordingly, we seek comment on 
alternatives including any that may further minimize the impact on public safety entities. 
F. Federal Rules that May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict with the Proposed Rule
None.
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181 
22
STATEMENT OF 
CHAIRMAN KEVIN J. MARTIN
Re: Implementing a Nationwide, Broadband, Interoperable Public Safety Network in the 700 MHz 
Band; Development of Operational, Technical and Spectrum Requirements for Meeting Federal, 
State and Local Public Safety Communications Requirements Through the Year 2010, Ninth 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, (PS Docket No. 06-229, WT Docket No. 96-86).
In our Intelligence Reform Act report to Congress last year, the Commission found that 
emergency response providers would benefit from development of an integrated, interoperable network 
capable of delivering broadband services nationwide.  Consistent with that finding, and at the urging of 
public safety, earlier this year the Commission asked whether certain channels within the current twenty-
four megahertz of public safety spectrum in the 700 MHz band should be modified to accommodate 
broadband communications.
Today we expand upon our earlier inquiry by seeking comment on a national approach to 
maximize public safety access to interoperable, broadband spectrum in the 700 MHz band. I believe this 
proposal could offer many public safety benefits and is consistent with public safety’s views on achieving 
an interoperable broadband network.  Many national and local public safety organizations have expressed 
support for a public-private partnership approach for a single, national licensee to achieve an 
interoperable public safety broadband network in the context of other public safety proposals.  One 
example is the Cyren Call proposal, which involves spectrum not currently allocated to public safety.  The 
proposal in today’s notice contains these elements, and it involves only the portion of the spectrum 
already allocated for public safety. 
Although today’s proposal is similar to other public safety proposals, it is not intended to be a 
substitute for them.  The question of how the nation’s spectrum resources in the 700 MHz band should be 
allocated is ultimately a question for Congress, not the Commission.  If Congress determines that 
additional spectrum resources in the 700 MHz band should be allocated to public safety, the Commission 
would implement that determination. 
In the meantime, however, the Commission is charged with efficiently and effectively managing 
the 700 MHz spectrum already allocated to public safety by Congress.  We must continue to discharge 
that obligation to the best of our ability consistent with our statutory authority.  To do otherwise would 
abdicate our responsibility at a time when it is more important than ever to ensure that our rules give first 
responders the communications capabilities they need to protect safety of life and property of the 
American public.
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181 
23
STATEMENT OF
COMMISSIONER MICHAEL J. COPPS
Re:  Implementing a Nationwide, Broadband, Interoperable Public Safety Network in the 700 MHz 
Band; Development of Operational, Technical and Spectrum Requirements for Meeting Federal, 
State and Local Public Safety Communications Requirements Through the Year 2010, Ninth 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, (PS Docket No. 06-229, WT Docket No. 96-86).
As I have said many times, the safety of the people must always be the first and foremost 
responsibility of government.  We are now over five years out from the tragedy of 9/11 and over a year 
since Hurricane Katrina, and we know this:  America is not as ready as it could be and should be for the 
next attack or natural disaster, whenever that awful day should come.  And that sad truth is not because 
there are any real disagreements about the policy objectives here with respect to our nation’s heroic first 
responders.  Everyone understands the need to provide the nation’s first responders with interoperable 
equipment when they charge into a burning building or perform the thousands of other dangerous tasks 
each year that keep us safe.  Everyone understands the importance of making sure that these dedicated 
public servants have the resources and funding they need to keep us – and themselves – out of harm’s 
way.  And everyone understands that public safety providers must be able to avail themselves of all the 
extraordinary advances that high-tech companies and commercial providers have made in network 
architecture and advanced hardware.  
Today’s NPRM attempts to address these objectives by proposing an inventive public safety 
model – the creation of a nationwide, interoperable broadband public safety communications network in 
the 700 MHz band.  Specifically, the NPRM seeks comment on whether a national licensee can create 
such a network through a public-private arrangement, whereby commercial providers would assist public 
safety agencies in implementing this network.  
As I have stated before, government-commercial sharing of public safety spectrum raises a host 
of complex technical and policy questions – the margin for error is uniquely low, and we must be 
exceptionally confident that there are no unintended consequences flowing from any actions we approve.  
At the same time, given the long-standing need for reform in this area, we simply cannot afford to ignore 
innovative ideas that could potentially revolutionize existing public safety spectrum management.  I 
therefore applaud the Chairman’s initiative in seeking comment on this proposal.  Thanks also to the staff 
of the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau for preparing and presenting this thoughtful NPRM.  
I look forward to reading comments from interested and knowledgeable stakeholders, who can help this 
agency sort through the important and technically complex questions raised by today’s item.
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181 
24
STATEMENT OF
COMMISSIONER JONATHAN S. ADELSTEIN
Re: Implementing a Nationwide, Broadband, Interoperable Public Safety Network in the 700 MHz 
Band; Development of Operational, Technical and Spectrum Requirements for Meeting Federal, 
State and Local Public Safety Communications Requirements Through the Year 2010, Ninth 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, (PS Docket No. 06-229, WT Docket No. 96-86).
I am very pleased to support this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking because it represents a creative 
approach to an interoperability problem that has long plagued our nation’s public safety community.  As 
we become fully immersed in the digital broadband world, it is critical that our first responders have 
access to the same first-rate communications systems that many consumers already enjoy.  Our proposal 
today puts us closer to that goal than we have come in a long time.  
True interoperability has been an elusive goal for the public safety community.  Despite our best 
efforts, the Commission’s policies to date have not provided the results we had hoped.  While we have 
seen recent efforts to create certain state-wide and metropolitan area networks, most public safety 
communications systems remain localized, and interoperability between local, state, and federal agencies 
is limited.  Our item today leapfrogs these previous interoperability efforts and focuses attention on our 
ability to leverage the licensing process to create a real incentive for nationwide interoperability through a 
careful balance of flexibility and conditions.
This “carrot and stick” approach is consistent with a view of spectrum policy that I have long 
advocated.  I believe that the Commission has a responsibility to be more resourceful in its approach to 
spectrum policy and to take a more active role in being on the leading edge of spectrum technology.  I 
have called for the Commission to consider policies that promote flexibility and innovation. Since the 
spectrum is a finite public resource, we need to see results as well – particularly in the area of wireless 
broadband, whether for public safety or commercial purposes.  I am pleased that this item follows many 
of these same principles.
Finally, while I wholeheartedly support the launch of this proceeding today, I do want to counsel 
for taking a cautious and deliberate approach to an ultimate resolution.  It is important to acknowledge 
that our proposal today talks in very broad strokes and looks to commenters to fill in many important 
details and specifics.  A Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making that details a more specific and 
complete proposal may be needed in order to make sure that we really get this proceeding right.  Our item 
today puts the Commission in a place that it does not routinely occupy.  If we decide to go forward with a 
national broadband public safety licensee, we need to get the specifics nailed down as clearly as possible.  
We may only have one real bite at this apple, and for the sake of public safety, we want it to be a good 
one.
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181 
25
STATEMENT OF
COMMISSIONER DEBORAH TAYLOR TATE
Re: Implementing a Nationwide, Broadband, Interoperable Public Safety Network in the 700 MHz 
Band; Development of Operational, Technical and Spectrum Requirements for Meeting Federal, 
State and Local Public Safety Communications Requirements Through the Year 2010, Ninth 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, (PS Docket No. 06-229, WT Docket No. 96-86).
Earlier this year, I had an opportunity to hear local public safety personnel recount their 
experiences on the ground during the tragic events of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.  Their eyewitness 
accounts underscore how important it is that our nation’s first responders have access to reliable and 
redundant communications in the event of an emergency, and how much remains to be done before those 
tools are available.  A key challenge to effective emergency communications is the current shortfall in the 
number of interoperable systems that enable different public safety entities to communicate with each 
other and coordinate their efforts when time is of the essence.  Therefore, it is critical that we take steps to 
improve public safety interoperability for all types of disasters – whether terrorist, natural, or even a 
health pandemic.
With this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, we propose a centralized and national approach to 
maximize public safety access to interoperable, broadband spectrum in the 700 MHz band, and, at the same 
time, foster and promote the development and deployment of advanced broadband applications, related 
radio technologies, and a modern, IP-based system architecture.  I look forward to working with my fellow 
Commissioners on this proceeding and hearing from public safety entities, state and local officials, and all 
interested stakeholders regarding what we can do to ensure the reliability and interoperability of 
communications in order to better protect all Americans.
Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-181 
26
STATEMENT OF
COMMISSIONER ROBERT M. McDOWELL
Re: Implementing a Nationwide, Broadband, Interoperable Public Safety Network in the 700 MHz 
Band; Development of Operational, Technical and Spectrum Requirements for Meeting Federal, 
State and Local Public Safety Communications Requirements Through the Year 2010, Ninth 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, (PS Docket No. 06-229, WT Docket No. 96-86).
I have said many times that I am fully committed to ensuring that the Commission takes 
advantage of all opportunities to spur technological innovation and increased access to broadband 
services by emergency response providers.  Our country is teeming with entrepreneurs who are ready, 
willing and able to invest and take the risks necessary to accelerate the development and roll-out of 
advanced services for an array of customers, including public safety agencies.  Moreover, given that over
220 million Americans rely upon wireless technologies for anytime, anywhere communications, the 
public has high expectations for reliable communications and effective coordination among emergency 
personnel in times of crisis.  I am hopeful that the questions we pose today will enhance the ongoing 
dialogue regarding partnerships among the public safety community and the commercial wireless 
industry.  The same market and technological forces that have made advanced wireless services an 
everyday part of living for the vast majority of Americans can and should be leveraged by the public 
safety community to make robust, redundant, low cost solutions widely available to our nation’s first 
responders.  
I’d like to thank the Bureau staff for their work on this NPRM.  I’d also like to thank Angela 
Giancarlo of my staff for her guidance on this matter.