MetroPCS defended its recently submitted band plan for 90 MHz of ...

meeting to revise a Oct. 2003 advanced wireless services (AWS) spectrum band plan “in light of the recent proposals” (CD July 19 p3). On the table are: (1) A T- Mobile/Rural Telecom Group plan proposing to break the 30 MHz E Block at 1740-1755/2140-2155 MHz into 3 parts to create a 5th AWS license block, leaving the A, B and C Blocks unchanged. (2) A Verizon Wireless plan, which, unlike T-Mobile/RTG’s, would place the blocks in a different order and put 10 MHz more spectrum in REAG licenses. (3) A MetroPCS plan proposing to break the AWS band into 7, mostly 10 MHz, blocks. MetroPCS said its plan is best because: (1) “A greater variety of geographic areas and more 10 MHz channel blocks will accommodate diverse business plans and services.” (2) “More [smaller] spectrum blocks will be offered in the auction,” letting applicants “build their spectrum holdings based on their needs not upon a government- ordained market structure.” (3) “MEAs are a unique feature” of the MetroPCS plan, because “MEAs are large enough to allow for a whole metropolitan area and surrounding area to be served, but not so large as to include multiple metropolitan areas.” (4) The plan facilitates “efficient aggregation of spectrum and territory in the auction process.” (5) It encourages “the gradual move away from MSA/RSA-based allocation plans which divide the country up into too many small areas (734 in the U.S.), many of which go unassigned.” MetroPCS voiced concern about the AWS band plans from T-Mobile/RTG and Verizon Wireless, saying they are “much too heavily weighted toward” large 30 MHz or 20 MHz channel blocks and large geographic areas, which “limit opportunities for incumbents and new entrants.” It said it doesn’t view “partitioning and disaggregation” as an effective licensing mechanism: “It is easier to aggregate spectrum and market areas in the auction than to disaggregate or partition, particularly in light of the anti-collusion rule.” Providing “numerous licensing alternatives” for applicants would better serve public interest, it said. Meanwhile, Verizon Wireless said it agrees with recent CTIA criticisms of Council Tree’s proposed constraints on designated entities’ affiliation with large wireless carriers. “Some of the changes requested by Council Tree have not been raised in this proceeding before and appear to require a further rulemaking proceeding,” it told the Commission.