What’s New in Wireless - May 2025

The wireless industry has revolutionized the way we connect, from facilitating teleworking, distance learning, and telemedicine to allowing the American public to interact virtually in almost all other aspects of their daily lives. Leading policymakers – federal regulators and legislators – are making it a top priority to ensure that the wireless industry has the tools and resources it needs to keep pace with this evolving landscape. This blog provides monthly updates on actions by federal regulatory bodies responsible for communications policy and Congressional efforts to support wireless connectivity. And this month we highlight the recent actions taken by the FCC to address use of the 37 GHz band for wireless services.

Regulatory Actions and Initiatives

Spectrum

The FCC Takes Action on the Lower 37 GHz Band. On April 29, 2025, the FCC released a Report and Order, Sixth Report and Order, and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“Sixth Order” and “FNPRM,” respectively) that, among other things, establishes a licensing framework for federal and non-federal use of the 37-37.6 GHz band (“Lower 37 GHz band”) so that it can be used for a variety of services and use cases, including backhaul and backbone links, fixed wireless broadband systems, Internet of Things (“IoT”)-type systems, and supplemental capacity for mobile systems. In particular, the Sixth Order establishes a site-based licensing framework for the Lower 37 GHz band and a two-phased process for coordinating proposed site-based operations, granting priority access for military deployments in the 37-37.2 GHz portion of the band, and requiring registered stations to be constructed and operating within 12 months of when the registration date for the site is granted. The FNPRM seeks comment on the appropriate emissions limits for commercial wireless operations in the Upper Microwave Flexible Use Service above 37 GHz and whether the first phase of the coordination process could be enhanced by considerations of additional factors like clutter. The deadlines for submitting comments and reply comments in response to the FNPRM are 30 days and 45 days, respectively, after publication in the Federal Register.

The FCC Seeks Comment on Relaxing Use of the 4.9 GHz Band for Wireless Services. The FCC’s Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (“WTB”) and Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (“PSHSB”) released a Public Notice on March 26, 2025, seeking comment on a Petition for Rulemaking filed by the Association of Public Safety Communications Officials International, Inc. (“APCO”) regarding more flexible use of the 4.9 GHz band. APCO’s Petition specifically requests that the Commission modify the power and out-of-band emissions limits for the 4.9 GHz band, which is dedicated for public safety uses, in Part 90 of its rules to more closely align with the Commission’s Part 27 rules, which govern mobile broadband network deployments. APCO contends that its requested modifications would better facilitate 5G deployments in the band. Comments were due April 25, 2025, and reply comments will be due May 12, 2025. 

The FCC Dismisses 5.9 GHz Waivers Related to Connected Cars. On April 21, 2025, the PSHSB, OET, and WTB jointly released an Order of Dismissal in the 5.850-5.925 GHz band (“5.9 GHz band”) proceeding to dismiss the remaining Cellular Vehicle-to-Everything (“C‑V2X”) early transition waivers filed by nine applicants, which are listed in Appendix A of the Order. The Commission previously adopted a Second Report and Order last November, which, among other things, permitted Part 90 Intelligent Transportation System licensees to operate C‑V2X-based roadside units (“RSUs”) in the 5.9 GHz band by obtaining an early transition waiver under the Commission’s old Dedicated Short-Range Communications rules. Because the Second Report and Order’s rules are now in effect as of February 11, 2025, these early transition waivers are no longer necessary. Accordingly, the applicants may now directly seek C-V2X authorization under the new rules. They may also seek equipment authorization for C-V2X-based RSUs or on-board units.

The FCC Proposes to Make 12.7 GHz and 42 GHz Spectrum Available for Satellite Communications to Supplement or Complement Wireless Services. On May 1, 2025, the FCC released a draft FNPRM that would, if adopted at the Commission’s next open meeting in May, seek comment on ways for the 12.7-13.25 GHz (“12.7 GHz”) and the 42-42.5 GHz (“42 GHz”) bands to be used more intensively for satellite communications, as an alternative, or complement to, terrestrial wireless use in both bands. The FNPRMwould seek comment on potentially eliminating existing restrictions that prevent use of the 12.7 GHz band by both geostationary orbit and non-geostationary orbit systems, and it would consider creating an allocation for fixed-satellite service in the 42 GHz band. The FNPRM would also seek comment on allowing both Earth-to-space and space-to-Earth satellite communications in both bands. Further, the FNPRM would seek comment on allowing Earth Stations in Motion and blanket-licensed earth stations in the 12.7 GHz band. Finally, the FNPRM would seek comment on ways to protect incumbent users in the 12.7 GHz band as well as ways to protect users (particularly federal operators) in adjacent bands. Comments and reply comments will be due 30 days and 45 days, respectively, after publication in the Federal Register.

The FCC Conditionally Grants Requests for Waiver to Permit the Use of Mobile Devices That Utilize Multiple Spectrum Bands. On May 2, 2025, the WTB and the Office of Engineering and Technology (“OET”) released an Order conditionally granting Ericsson’s and Samsung’s requests for waiver of the Commission’s rules so that they can manufacture, market, and sell multiband devices capable of operating in both the 3.5 GHz Citizens Broadband Radio Service (“CBRS”) and the 3.7 GHz Service. The WTB and OET found that granting Samsung and Ericsson conditional waivers will serve the public interest by helping to facilitate the deployment of multiband devices capable of operating across multiple wireless services. The WTB and OET, however, imposed the following conditions:

1. Each Samsung and Ericsson radio, when operated in 3.5 GHz band-only mode for equipment authorization testing, must comply with the relevant conducted power levels in the FCC’s rules, except that the radio’s out-of-band emissions may be limited to a conducted power level of no greater than -25 dBm/MHz for frequencies between 3.72 and 4.0 GHz;
2. Except when testing for equipment authorization purposes, the subject radio may not operate in a standalone 3.5 GHz band mode and must be configured such that the operator does not have access to controls that could result in such operation; and
3. This waiver and any related technical approvals of the multiband device are subject to future FCC rulemaking actions, and the subject device must comply with all future FCC rules in their entirety.

Prior to marketing, Samsung and Ericsson must also submit their base stations for testing and certification – and the base stations must demonstrate compliance with the conditions above during the testing and certification process – in accordance with Part 2 of the FCC’s rules.

Wireless Networks, Equipment, and Infrastructure

The FCC Proposes to Strengthen the Security of its Equipment Authorization Program. On May 1, 2025, the FCC released a draft Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would, if adopted at the Commission’s next open meeting in May, establish rules to ensure the integrity and security of the entities carrying out the FCC’s equipment authorization program. The Report and Order would, among other things, prohibit recognition, and permit the withdrawal of existing recognition, of any Telecommunications Certification Body (“TCB”), test lab, or laboratory accreditation body owned by (i.e., an entity with 10% or more equity or voting interest), controlled by, or subject to the direction of a “prohibited entity.” It would also prohibit any such TCB, test lab, or laboratory accreditation body from participating in any aspect of the FCC’s equipment authorization program (including testing devices as part of the Supplier’s Declaration of Conformity procedures). The FNPRM would seek comment on whether to extend the prohibitions adopted in the Report and Order to include TCBs, test labs, and lab accreditation bodies operating within the jurisdiction of a foreign adversary and consider adding entities from several additional lists maintained by other federal agencies to the definition of a “prohibited entity.” Comments and reply comments will be due 30 days and 60 days, respectively, after publication in the Federal Register.

The FCC Seeks Comment on a Petition for Rulemaking Seeking to Update National Environmental Policy Act Review. On March 31, 2025, the WTB released a Public Notice seeking comment on a Petition for Rulemaking filed by CTIA that requests the FCC to update its rules implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”). In its Petition, CTIA urges the Commission to “act now to implement the statutory amendments [to NEPA] and reduce unnecessary regulatory red tape for wireless facility deployments initiated by the private sector that lack substantial oversight by the Commission.” Comments were due April 30, 2025, and reply comments will be due May 15, 2025.

The FCC Announces That it Has Borrowed Funding for its Rip-and-Replace Program. On April 15, 2025, the FCC’s Wireline Competition Bureau released a Public Notice to announce that, pursuant to the Spectrum and Secure Technology and Innovation Act, the Commission has borrowed the full amount funding needed to support parties participating in its rip-and-replace program – approximately $3.08 billion – from the U.S. Treasury. The Public Notice adds that the Commission has made that funding available to program participants under a new allocation so that they can fulfill their obligations under the program.

The FCC Further Extends the Deadline for IoT Cybersecurity Labeling Program Recommendations. On May 6, 2025, the PSHSB granted UL LLC’s (“UL’s”) second request to extend the deadline to submit recommendations of cybersecurity standards and testing procedures to be used to determine if products meet those standards for the FCC’s IoT Cybersecurity Labeling Program. As we previously reported, UL was selected as the Lead Administrator for the IoT Cybersecurity Labeling Program. UL’s recommendations are now due June 13, 2025.

Wireless Services

The FCC Announces Comment Dates on Wireless E911 Location Accuracy Requirements. On May 7, 2025, the PSHSB announced that comments and reply comments on proposals to improve the FCC’s wireless 911 location accuracy rules will be due June 6, 2025 and July 7, 2025, respectively.

In the Courts

District Court Grants Summary Judgment in Favor of Tower Company Seeking to Close Coverage Gap. On April 14, 2025, in Intermax Towers, LLC v. Ada Cnty., et al, 2025 WL 1104041 (D. Idaho Apr. 14, 2025), the United States District Court for the District of Idaho granted summary judgment in favor of Plaintiff Intermax Towers, LLC (“Intermax”) and ordered Defendants Ada County, Idaho (the “County”), and the Ada County Board of Commissioners (“Board”) to grant Intermax’s application for a Conditional Use Permit (“CUP”) and issue the necessary permits for Intermax to construct a wireless communications facility (“cell tower”) in Ada County.

At issue in this case was whether the Board had unlawfully denied Intermax’s application for a CUP to build a cell tower under the “effective prohibition” and “substantial evidence” provisions of the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 (“TCA”), codified as 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(i)(II) and (iii).

Intermax filed its CUP application seeking to construct a cell tower in order to fill a gap in wireless coverage that would be created by the demolition of a grain silo that is currently housing Verizon wireless networking equipment. In addition, the area around the site of the proposed tower is rapidly densifying and putting a strain on Verizon’s service and infrastructure in the County. After reviewing its application and holding a number of public hearings, the Board denied Intermax’s CUP application.

Ultimately, the District Court held that there was no genuine dispute of material fact that the Board’s decision to deny Intermax’s application was not based on “substantial evidence,” as required by the TCA. Notably, the District Court rejected each of the Board’s bases for the denial, holding that reasons for the Board’s denial were unrelated to any substantive criteria in the local zoning code or were limited to “generalized and unsubstantiated concerns of a few citizens.” The District Court concluded that because a decision denying an application must be grounded in the substantive requirements set forth in state and local law, the Board’s decision could not be based on “substantial evidence” where, as here, the Board “invented a criterion for which the applicable zoning ordinances did not provide.” The District Court also rejected the County’s arguments that Intermax did not provide adequate proof that the cell tower would provide wireless service or that the tower would not have an adverse impact on the surrounding area. The District Court, instead, found that there was ample undisputed evidence in the record, including letters of intent from AT&T and T-Mobile showing interest in collocating on the tower, that the tower would in fact provide some carrier’s wireless service. Likewise, the District Court noted that Intermax had provided more than enough uncontested evidence that the cell tower would not create undue adverse impacts on the surrounding area.

Because the District Court concluded that the Board’s decision was not based on substantial evidence, it did not reach the question of whether the Board’s denial of Intermax’s CUP application constituted an “effective prohibition” of service.

Mintz represented Intermax in this case.

Legislative Efforts

The House Passes Three Wireless-Related Bills. On April 28, 2025, the House passed the following bills:

• The Foreign Adversary Communications Transparency Act, which would require the FCC to publish a list of companies that both hold FCC licenses or authorizations and are owned by foreign adversarial governments, including the governments of China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea;
• The Future Uses of Technology Upholding Reliable and Enhanced (FUTURE) Networks Act, which would direct the FCC to establish a 6G Task Force that would be responsible for reporting on 6G wireless technology, including the status of industry-led standards setting, the limitations of 6G, and how entities across all levels of government can leverage 6G; and
• The NTIA Reauthorization Act, which would reauthorize NTIA and codify NTIA’s Office of Spectrum Management and Office of International Affairs in the NTIA Organization Act.

The bills are now in the Senate.

Subscribe To Viewpoints