| AT&T | AT&T argues that the CBRS framework is underperforming and should be relocated from 3.55-3.7 GHz to 3.1-3.3 GHz, freeing the 3.5 GHz band for exclusive full-power 5G deployments compatible with adjacent 3.7 and 3.45 GHz bands. The company proposes an incentive auction to fund CBRS relocation, with PAL holders choosing to relocate, convert rights to vouchers, or receive cash payments. AT&T opposes any changes to out-of-band emissions limits at the lower band edge and opposes mandatory TDD synchronization between CBRS and adjacent-band operators. [source] | 2024-12-05 |
| CTIA | CTIA advocates for CBRS reform opportunities that would enhance utility across the 3 GHz spectrum band. The filing emphasizes the critical importance of mid-band spectrum (particularly 3 GHz) for 5G and beyond, and argues the Commission has an opportunity to create a contiguous 700+ megahertz "superhighway" by coordinating CBRS with adjacent spectrum bands (3.45 GHz, Lower C-band, and Upper C-band). CTIA calls for transparency around CBRS usage to facilitate future dialogue on the band. [source] | 2026-02-10 |
| EchoStar | EchoStar advocates for updating CBRS band rules to permit higher power levels and relaxed emission limits (from -25 dBm/MHz to -13 dBm/MHz). The company submitted a technical study concluding that these changes would not cause harmful interference to incumbents and would materially improve spectrum utility and coverage without downside. [source] | 2025-05-19 |
| Intelsat | Intelsat opposes relaxing CBRS out-of-band emission (OOBE) limits and opposes changes to FSS registration eligibility that would weaken incumbent protections. Intelsat supports geographic differentiation of protections, proposing that any changes to upper band-edge OOBE limits and TT&C site protections be limited to the Contiguous United States, while OCONUS regions retain current protections where FSS still uses 3.7-4.0 GHz. Intelsat also opposes changing OOBE limits within the 3.5 GHz band itself, and opposes tying earth station registration eligibility to timely annual registration. [source] | 2024-12-06 |
| NCTA | NCTA opposes the City of Brownsville's waiver petition to increase base station power limits for CBRS Category B devices, arguing that higher power levels would create harmful interference with over 1,000 existing GAA users in Cameron County and undermine the carefully calibrated CBRS framework designed for diverse users and innovation. While supporting the City's public safety and border security objectives, NCTA contends those goals can be met under existing rules and invites collaboration to develop deployment options, citing Las Vegas as a successful precedent. [source] | 2025-12-02 |
| T-Mobile | T-Mobile argues that the FCC should not make significant changes to CBRS technical rules without first gathering and publicly releasing aggregated data on current spectrum usage, conducting rigorous engineering analyses, and considering whether fundamental rule changes warrant relicensing the band. T-Mobile expresses concern that proposed power increases could cause substantial interference to existing CBRS operations and adjacent licensed services, and argues that if the band's character fundamentally changes, it should be reauditioned to ensure American taxpayers realize the spectrum's true value. [source] | 2024-12-06 |
| Verizon | Verizon presented technical analysis explaining that the interference contour of CBSD deployment is similar regardless of whether an area is covered by Category B or Category C cells. The company argues that while higher allowed EIRP power levels create larger cells with more coverage area, the propagation slope (the ratio of cell edge to interfered area) remains identical regardless of power level. [source] | 2025-03-17 |
| WISPA | WISPA opposes the City of Brownsville's petition for waiver of Section 96.41(b) to increase the maximum EIRP for Category B CBSDs from +47 dBm to +60 dBm (a 20-fold increase in power). WISPA argues Brownsville has not demonstrated "special circumstances" warranting waiver, that the higher power would cause harmful interference to PAL holders and GAA users, and that the waiver would undermine CBRS's design principles of low-power spectral reuse and sharing. [source] | 2025-12-30 |