(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

Sec. 6. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(c) Within 1 year of the date of this order, and annually thereafter, the Secretary, in consultation as appropriate with the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Homeland Security, Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Attorney General, the United States Trade Representative, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, shall assess and report to the President whether the actions taken by the Secretary pursuant to this order are sufficient and continue to be necessary to mitigate the risks identified in, and pursuant to, this order.

(b)The Secretary of Homeland Security shall continue to assess and identify entities, hardware, software, and services that present vulnerabilities in the United States and that pose the greatest potential consequences to the national security of the United States.The Secretary of Homeland Security, in coordination with sector-specific agencies and coordinating councils as appropriate, shall produce a written assessment within 80 days of the date of this order, and annually thereafter.This assessment shall include an evaluation of hardware, software, or services that are relied upon by multiple information and communications technology or service providers, including the communication services relied upon by critical infrastructure entities identified pursuant to section 9 of Executive Order 13636 of February 12, 2013 (Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity).

(ii) threats to the United States Government, United States critical infrastructure, and United States entities from information and communications technologies or services designed, developed, manufactured, or supplied by persons owned by, controlled by, or subject to the influence of a foreign adversary.

(i) threats enabled by information and communications technologies or services designed, developed, manufactured, or supplied by persons owned by, controlled by, or subject to the jurisdiction or direction of a foreign adversary; and

Sec. 5. Assessments and Reports. (a) The Director of National Intelligence shall continue to assess threats to the United States and its people from information and communications technology or services designed, developed, manufactured, or supplied by persons owned by, controlled by, or subject to the jurisdiction or direction of a foreign adversary. The Director of National Intelligence shall produce periodic written assessments of these threats in consultation with the heads of relevant agencies, and shall provide these assessments to the President, the Secretary for the Secretary's use in connection with his responsibilities pursuant to this order, and the heads of other agencies as appropriate. An initial assessment shall be completed within 40 days of the date of this order, and further assessments shall be completed at least annually, and shall include analysis of:

Sec. 4. Recurring and Final Reports to the Congress. The Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of State, is hereby authorized to submit recurring and final reports to the Congress on the national emergency declared in this order, consistent with section 401(c) of the NEA (50 U.S.C. 1641(c)) and section 204(c) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1703(c)).

(e)the term ''United States person'' means any United States citizen, permanent resident alien, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States (including foreign branches), or any person in the United States.

(c)the term ''information and communications technology or services'' means any hardware, software, or other product or service primarily intended to fulfill or enable the function of information or data processing, storage, retrieval, or communication by electronic means, including transmission, storage, and display;

(b)the term ''foreign adversary'' means any foreign government or foreign non-government person engaged in a long'term pattern or serious instances of conduct significantly adverse to the national security of the United States or security and safety of United States persons;

(c) The Secretary may, consistent with applicable law, redelegate any of the authorities conferred on the Secretary pursuant to this section within the Department of Commerce.

(b) Rules and regulations issued pursuant to this order may, among other things, determine that particular countries or persons are foreign adversaries for the purposes of this order; identify persons owned by, controlled by, or subject to the jurisdiction or direction of foreign adversaries for the purposes of this order; identify particular technologies or countries with respect to which transactions involving information and communications technology or services warrant particular scrutiny under the provisions of this order; establish procedures to license transactions otherwise prohibited pursuant to this order; establish criteria, consistent with section 1 of this order, by which particular technologies or particular participants in the market for information and communications technology or services may be recognized as categorically included in or as categorically excluded from the prohibitions established by this order; and identify a mechanism and relevant factors for the negotiation of agreements to mitigate concerns raised in connection with subsection 1(a) of this order. Within 150 days of the date of this order, the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the United States Trade Representative, the Director of National Intelligence, the Administrator of General Services, the Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission and, as appropriate, the heads of other agencies, shall publish rules or regulations implementing the authorities delegated to the Secretary by this order.

Sec. 2. Authorities. (a) The Secretary, in consultation with, or upon referral of a particular transaction from, the heads of other agencies as appropriate, is hereby authorized to take such actions, including directing the timing and manner of the cessation of transactions prohibited pursuant to section 1 of this order, adopting appropriate rules and regulations, and employing all other powers granted to the President by IEEPA, as may be necessary to implement this order. All agencies of the United States Government are directed to take all appropriate measures within their authority to carry out the provisions of this order.

(c) The prohibitions in subsection (a) of this section apply except to the extent provided by statutes, or in regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this order, and notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted prior to the effective date of this order.

(b) The Secretary, in consultation with the heads of other agencies as appropriate, may at the Secretary's discretion design or negotiate measures to mitigate concerns identified under section 1(a) of this order. Such measures may serve as a precondition to the approval of a transaction or of a class of transactions that would otherwise be prohibited pursuant to this order.

(C) otherwise poses an unacceptable risk to the national security of the United States or the security and safety of United States persons.

(B) poses an undue risk of catastrophic effects on the security or resiliency of United States critical infrastructure or the digital economy of the United States; or

(A) poses an undue risk of sabotage to or subversion of the design, integrity, manufacturing, production, distribution, installation, operation, or maintenance of information and communications technology or services in the United States;

(i) the transaction involves information and communications technology or services designed, developed, manufactured, or supplied, by persons owned by, controlled by, or subject to the jurisdiction or direction of a foreign adversary; and

Section 1. Implementation. (a) The following actions are prohibited: any acquisition, importation, transfer, installation, dealing in, or use of any information and communications technology or service (transaction) by any person, or with respect to any property, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, where the transaction involves any property in which any foreign country or a national thereof has any interest (including through an interest in a contract for the provision of the technology or service), where the transaction was initiated, is pending, or will be completed after the date of this order, and where the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary), in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the United States Trade Representative, the Director of National Intelligence, the Administrator of General Services, the Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, and, as appropriate, the heads of other executive departments and agencies (agencies), has determined that:

I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, find that foreign adversaries are increasingly creating and exploiting vulnerabilities in information and communications technology and services, which store and communicate vast amounts of sensitive information, facilitate the digital economy, and support critical infrastructure and vital emergency services, in order to commit malicious cyber-enabled actions, including economic and industrial espionage against the United States and its people. I further find that the unrestricted acquisition or use in the United States of information and communications technology or services designed, developed, manufactured, or supplied by persons owned by, controlled by, or subject to the jurisdiction or direction of foreign adversaries augments the ability of foreign adversaries to create and exploit vulnerabilities in information and communications technology or services, with potentially catastrophic effects, and thereby constitutes an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States. This threat exists both in the case of individual acquisitions or uses of such technology or services, and when acquisitions or uses of such technologies are considered as a class. Although maintaining an open investment climate in information and communications technology, and in the United States economy more generally, is important for the overall growth and prosperity of the United States, such openness must be balanced by the need to protect our country against critical national security threats. To deal with this threat, additional steps are required to protect the security, integrity, and reliability of information and communications technology and services provided and used in the United States. In light of these findings, I hereby declare a national emergency with respect to this threat.

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code,

FierceVaccines Whistleblowers accuse Merck of withholding info on mumps vaccine;Lawsuits claiming Merck lied about mumps vaccine efficacy headed to trialWhistleblowers: Merck hid declining efficacy of MMR shotMeasles-jab maker Merck says it can only do so much to encourage vaccinationDisneyland measles outbreak adds fuel to heated anti-vaccination debateMeasles vaccination more likely when child's, not society's, benefits are stressedSurvey: 1 in 5 Americans think doctors know vaccines cause autismMike Adams of Natural News has posted the original complaint filed for the False Claim Act here.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention notes that mumps is no longer common in the U.S., although the number of cases has been rising. Last year, 1,151; two years ago, the number of reported cases reached 438 people.'' (Merck is Accused of Stonewalling Over Effectiveness of Mumps Vaccine Jun 8, 2015)

The federal government, by the way, declined to intervene '' or join '' the whistleblower lawsuit. We should note that several physicians later filed a lawsuit seeking class action status and charged the vaccine was mislabeled and was not the product for which the government or other purchasers paid, which meant that Merck violated the False Claims Act, according to court documents.

The mumps vaccine is a sizeable product for Merck, which reported that sales reached $721 million last year, when including both the MMR II vaccine '' which is mumps, measles and rubella '' and the ProQuad vaccine, a combination product that is also used to thwart chickenpox, according to a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

''The lawsuit has gained attention because it comes at a time of ongoing controversy over vaccine safety, in general, and resistance by some parents to having their children vaccinated. The issue was highlighted again last year after a measles outbreak at Disneyland in California, where 147 people were infected, prompting push back against religious exemptions for vaccination.

Either Merck knows the current efficacy of its mumps vaccine, or it does not,'' the attorney writes. ''Whichever the case, Merck should not be permitted to raise as one of its principal defenses that its vaccine has a high efficacy, which is accurately represented on the product's label, but then refuse to answer what it claims that efficacy actually is.''

''Rather than answer questions, Merck has taken an ''evasive approach in its blanket refusal'' to provide information effectiveness'... Instead, the drug maker cited data from nearly 50 years ago, when the vaccine was introduced, and that it is not possible to conduct new trials.

June 2015: Whistleblower attorney accuses Merck of stonewalling by withholding information and files a motion to compel Merck to comply. In his letter to the court overseeing the case, wrote:

On September 5, 2014, Judge Jones II of the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, rejected Merck's motion to dismiss. The Court rejected Merck's claim that FDA preempts state law. The purpose of the False Claim Act, a federal statute, was to allow whistleblowers to bring such claims in the name of the government.

That's why Merck found it critically important to keep claiming such a high efficacy rate, the complaint states. And, Chatom claims, that's why Merck went to great lengths, including ''manipulating its test procedures and falsifying the test results,'' to prop up the bogus figure, though it knew that the attenuated virus from which it created the vaccine had been altered over the years during the manufacturing process, and that the quality of the vaccine had degraded as a result.'' (cited by Dr. Mercola here )

Merck is the only manufacturer licensed by the FDA to sell the mumps vaccine in United States, and if it could not show that the vaccine was 95 percent effective, it risked losing its lucrative monopoly'...

''Merck has known for a decade that its mumps vaccine is ''far less effective'' than it tells the government, and it falsified test results and sold millions of doses of ''questionable efficacy,'' flooding and monopolizing the market'... Chatom says in its antitrust complaint that Merck falsely claims its mumps vaccine is 95 percent effective. That claim ''deterred and excluded competing manufacturers,'' who would enter the risky and expensive vaccine market only if they believed they could craft a better product'...

Two other class action lawsuits against Merck were filed in 2012. One was filed by a clinic, the other by two physicians claiming Merck violated the Sherman Act '' with monopolistic, anti-competitive practices '' and various violations of state laws. The two suits are being handled together. (U.S. v. Merck and U.S. v Merck and Chatom v. Merck). Courthouse News Service, July 2012:

These Merck whistleblowers claim they were threatened; that if they called the FDA they would be jailed. But they were reminded of the very large bonuses would come their way after the vaccines were certified.

They claim that by faking effectiveness tests ''i.e, committing fraud ''Merck misled the government about the effectiveness of the mumps component of its MMR II vaccine. The vaccine contained the same strain of mumps vaccine which had been shown to cause meningitis and was removed from the Canadian market. In 1978 Merck introduced the MMR II, using a different strain of the rubella vaccine, but the same strain of mumps vaccine.

The former Merck virologists '' Krahling and Wlochowski '' claim that over the years the effectiveness of the mumps vaccine declined because of its repeated passage through eggs. In order to continue the FDA license, Merck had to convince the FDA that the effectiveness stayed at a similar 95% effectiveness rate over the years.

Read more of Dr. Suzanne Humphries' thoughts about vaccine safety and why ''They Don't Want Your to Hear the Other Side''

These mumps outbreaks have already been proven NOT to be the result of failure to vaccinate, but vaccination failure'... and now it looks to all be a result of Merck's cooked books, used in order to maintain a commercial monopoly to generate increased revenue from increasing numbers of boosters.(Humphries Scientists Sue Merck: Allege Fraud for MMR Vaccine, GreenMedInfo.com)

If what these scientists claim is true, the net result of Merck's questionable activity was epidemics and outbreaks. It is known that the mumps component of all MMR vaccines from the mid 1990's has had a very low efficacy, estimated at 69% (Harling 05). The outbreaks started in UK and Europe in 1998. USA's outbreaks began in 2006.

Well, it turns out that the vaccine could not meet the goal that CDC projected to eradicate mumps by 2010, BECAUSE the vaccine, in its current state cannot reliably confer immunity, and is in fact a dilute version of what it once was when Maurice Hilleman invented it using the virus of his five year old daughter. The same viral mumps strain has been in use in every mumps or MMR vaccine Merck has made since 1967.''

''In the complaint, the scientists outline in great detail exactly how Merck manipulated the efficacy results in order to be able to say they had a 95% effective vaccine so that they could meet the fairytale goal of vaccine-induced ''herd immunity by 2010.''

Suzanne Humphries, MD, an internist / nephrologist who practiced medicine in the conventional system for 19 years, witnessed first-hand how that approach fails patients and creates a new disease time and again' summary explains in layman's terms how the tests were manipulated. Dr. Humphries is on the board of directors of the International Medical Council on Vaccination.

The desired end result is to have very low pre-vaccine antibody and 95% or more post-vaccine efficacy as measured by antibody neutralization. So, yet one more change in procedure was made: The pre-vaccine tests were all redone'...by fabricating the ''plaque'' counts on the pre-vaccine blood samples, counting plaques that were not there. What this allowed was a mathematical dilution of the pre-vaccine positive blood counts.'' (Court House News Service, June 27, 2012)

Just the addition of rabbit antibody made the pre-vaccine blood go from 10% positive to 80% positive and that was such an obvious sign of foul play that yet another manipulation had to be made.

''For the new testing method, the children's blood was tested for its ability to neutralize the virus using the vaccine strain virus, instead of the wild type strain that is much more infective, and the one that your children would most likely catch'... But still it was not 95% effective. In order to make the blood pass the test, antibodies from rabbits was added. The addition of rabbit antibody increased the efficacy to 100%. But that was not the end, because the test has to be done on pre-vaccine blood and post-vaccine blood.

According to the suit, the objective of the fraudulent trials was to ''report efficacy of 95% or higher regardless of the vaccine's true efficacy.''

''As the single largest purchaser of childhood vaccines (accounting for more than 50 percent of all vaccine purchasers), the United States is by far the largest financial victim of Merck's fraud. But the ultimate victims here are the millions of children who every year are being injected with a mumps vaccine that is not providing them with an adequate level of protection against mumps. And while this is a disease the CDC targeted ts the single largest purchaser of childhood vaccines (accounting for more than 50 percent of all vaccine purchasers), the United States is byo eradicate by now, the failure in Merck's vaccine has allowed this disease to linger with significant outbreaks continuing to occur,'' the suit alleges. (Forbes June 6, 2012)

The plaintiffs charge that Merck defrauded the U.S. for more than a decade by faking a vaccine efficacy rate of 95% even though the real rate was significantly lower.

Other motions must be filed by 20 December 2017. A motion for class action certification must be filed by 1 March 2018; and Merck must file its opposition to class certification by 5 April 2018.

In January 31, 2016, the court ordered that discovery, the process of gathering evidence, must be completed by 1 March 2017, over a year from now. The court also ordered that expert discovery needs to be completed by 31 October 2017.

According to Krahling and Wlochowski's complaint, they were threatened with jail were they to alert the FDA to the fraud being committed.

The suit charges that Merck knew its measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) vaccine was less effective than the purported 95% level, and it alleges that senior management was aware and also oversaw testing that concealed the actual effectiveness. According to the lawsuit, Merck began a sham testing program in the late 1990's to hide the declining efficacy of the vaccine. The objective of the fraudulent trials was to ''report efficacy of 95% or higher regardless of the vaccine's true efficacy.''

This is a major federal case alleging fraud in vaccine testing; it encapsulates how medical research can be manipulated to achieve desired results, and why it may be wise to question the integrity and the validity of ''science-based medicine.''

Stephen A. Krahling and Joan A. Wlochowski, former Merck virologists blew the whistle by filing a qui tam action lawsuit '-- U.S. v Merck & Co. '-- in August 2010. The scientists allege that the efficacy tests for the measles, mumps, rubella vaccine (MMR) were faked. The document was unsealed in June, 2012.

City officials are urging certain groups to be particularly aware of potential symptoms, including unvaccinated children, unvaccinated adults born in 1957 or later, and those with weakened immune systems.

Inhalation of the airborne virus reportedly infects up to 90 percent of those not immune.

According to the city, the virus is easily transmitted, usually through a cough or sneeze that can linger in the air for up to an hour-at which time the risk of infection dissipates.

Measles symptoms start to show seven to 21 days after exposure and infected people do not show symptoms during the first four days of their most contagious period, city officials said.

The next stage involves a rash that typically appears on the face before spreading down the body.

While the person is no longer contagious, city officials have advised anyone who visited Berkeley Bowl, located at 2020 Oregon St., from 3 to 5 p.m. May 7 and is not immune to look for the first stage of symptoms: runny nose, red eyes, cough and fever.

"We hope to find very new and effective ways to engage people in the climate crisis, and scale what works to help dramatically accelerate action," Marshall said. "Our goal is to help people realize how massively important this issue is."

To help formulate a messaging strategy, he united 16 prominent firms in the creative industry that are forming a non-profit coalition called the Potential Energy Coalition. It will soon launch a series of creative climate campaigns that will appear in print and digital media, as well as on TV and radio. The campaigns are designed for awareness and persuasion.

In Marshall's words, this is the most "wicked" branding and communications challenge because of vast political divisions and feelings of detachment from climate change, such as people believing, "It's not important to me and I'm not important to it." Marshall said the term seriously lacks energy and relevance, and "badly" needs rebranding.

Whether it's rebranding or reframing, one thing everyone in the climate conscious community agrees on is: "climate change needs a kick in the butt." Those are the words of an Ohio woman involved in a focus group conducted by John Marshall, a senior client advisor at Lippincott, a brand strategy consultancy.

More important, Fenton said, is "to simply explain how we are heating the planet and how that is hurting people, communities and the economy. Too few people really understand this in simple terms or images."

"I think it is too late to attempt to change the terms global warming and climate change," said David Fenton, founder and chairman of Fenton Communications, a social change agency. "They are now fully implanted in people's consciousness and would be very hard to change."

But not everyone is convinced a name change is needed or even possible.

"It's now a crisis, an emergency, and we need to engage people to demand smart policy and innovation," she said. "Time is not on our side."

Sarah Finnie Robinson, a senior fellow at the Institute for Sustainable Energy at Boston University, said she signed "because we have not addressed climate change properly, despite scientists' dire warnings."

This week, people in the climate-engaged community have fielded a flurry of emails from organizations like The Climate Reality Project and 350.org. The climate advocacy non-profits have asked them to sign the petition, which garnered more than 35,000 signatures by Thursday morning.

One online petition from The Action Network, a progressive advocacy organization, shows some are pushing for this change. It calls on major TV networks to "call the climate crisis transforming the Earth exactly what it is: a climate crisis."

"Independents are thinking less about what camp they fall into because they are not driven by partisan beliefs and visceral reactions. It implies they are thinking more critically about the term," Gerrol said.

SPARK Neuro The term "climate crisis" appeared to fall in a sweet spot. It performed well in terms of responses across the political spectrum and elicited the greatest emotional response among independents.

"The term 'environmental destruction' seems to have crossed a line with Republicans. It is likely seen as alarmist, perhaps even implying blame, which can lead to counterarguing and pushback," he said.

Among the Republicans in the study, the term "environmental destruction" evoked what was considered an extreme reaction, registering an emotional response almost four times greater than that of their responses to the term "climate change."

"People tend to underestimate how much emotions factor in," he said. "Ultimately it is emotions that change hearts and minds and lead to actions."

Spencer Gerrol, CEO of SPARK Neuro, said evoking emotion is vital to getting people to act. Because terms like climate change and global warming do not imply good or bad, they don't spark passion, he said.

Among Democrats, the study found a 60% greater emotional response to the term "climate crisis" than to "climate change," and a tripling in emotional response among Republicans.

The electrical activity of the participants' brains and skin was rated on a scale of zero to five -- five being the strongest. Those results were then compared to a traditional survey for reference.

"Sea levels will rise dramatically, to the point that many coastal cities will be submerged, as a result of [INSERT TERM]."

A total of 120 people -- 40 Republicans, 40 Democrats and 40 independents -- participated in the study, which measured the "emotional intensity" of responses to audio recordings of various controversial phrases, with each term inserted, like this example below:

New York City-based SPARK Neuro, a neuroanalytics company that measures emotion and attention, studied how participants responded to six terms -- "climate crisis," "environmental destruction," "environmental collapse," "weather destabilization," "global warming" and "climate change."

She's not alone in her sentiment. Many of those engaged in environmental advocacy feel the term "climate change" fails to convey the specificity or urgency needed to address the gravity of the climate challenge.

Greta Thunberg , a 16-year-old who leads a global climate movement, asked in a recent tweet, "Can we all now please stop saying 'climate change' and instead call it what it is: climate breakdown, climate crisis, climate emergency, ecological breakdown, ecological crisis and ecological emergency?"

Most people would have had their own fleas and lice, when the plague arrived in Europe in 1346, because they bathed much less often.

Experts point out that rats were not that common in northern Europe, which was hit equally hard by plague as the rest of Europe, and that the plague spread faster than humans might have been exposed to their fleas.

The pandemic spread from Europe through the 14th and 19th centuries - thought to come from fleas which fed on infected rats before biting humans and passing the bacteria to them.

When the Great Plague of 1665 hit, a fifth of people in London died, with victims shut in their homes and a red cross painted on the door with the words 'Lord have mercy upon us'.

The Black Death of 1348 famously killed half of the people in London within 18 months, with bodies piled five-deep in mass graves.

WHAT CAUSED EUROPE'S BUBONIC PLAGUES?The plague, caused by the bacterium Yersinia pestis, was the cause of some of the world's deadliest pandemics, including the Justinian Plague, the Black Death, and the major epidemics that swept through China in the late 1800s.

'It goes against our modern sensibilities, but there is nothing else to keep their populations bound,' said

To help mitigate the problem, experts interviewed by Randall say that cities can begin to pointedly reduce rat populations, especially since humans have also worked to stifle the amount of predators like snakes and coyotes who keep rodent numbers in check.

The world's most dangerous occurrence of bubonic plague, the Black Death, and one of the most devastating pandemics ever recorded occurred in the mid 1300's and was responsible for killing as many as 200 million people across Europe, Asia, and Africa.

The Black Death is one of the worst known pandemics in human history and could potentially be aided by a changing climate says one author and journalist

Last year, researchers published a report in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that links a change in climate and rat populations to the incidence and spread of the plague in Europe.

While it may seem outlandish that the world is still at risk of another outbreak of Bubonic plague, the impact of climate change has been noted by other modern studies.

Those people, who often live in close proximity to fleas and rats, could be the first to be affected says Randall, and from there the disease could spread.

According to a previous report from the LA Times, homeless populations have boomed in the last several years, rising by about 39 percent since 2014 to 53,000 people in 2019.

Homeless populations would be among the most at-risk people since they are often forced to live in proximity to rodents and other pests. File photo

The situation Randall outlines in the report would apply to almost every metropolis across the globe, but according to him, Los Angeles is in a particularly harrowing position due to one key factor: homeless populations.

'Any climate change conditions that increase the number of fleas [also increase] the distribution of plague,' said Dr. Janet Foley, a professor of medicine and epidemiology at UC Davis in Randall's report.

Those rats, explains Randall, could be the linchpin in a potential dangerous situation, as they tend to harbor fleas containing bubonic plague bacterium.

According to the UN, an overwhelming 68 percent of humans worldwide are expected to live in urban environments by 2050.

In addition to more conducive weather, a higher preference towards urban living has increased food supplies -- namely trash -- for city-dwelling rodents.

Citing one of the world's leading authorities on rats, Robert Corrigan, who holds a doctorate in urban rodentology from Purdue University and has been profiled by the New Yorker, Randall says urban rat populations have increased 15 to 20 percent globally.

'Longer, hotter weather patterns are extending the breeding season of rats and rodents, leading to a steep increase in their numbers in places like Los Angeles, New York and Houston,' wrote Randall in the op-ed for the LA Times.

Rats act as vehicles for fleas which carry the plague. Once those fleas come in contact with humans it can spread quickly to devastating results

Among the ripple effects of a rapidly changing climate, says Randall, are warmer temperatures which for some species will spell disaster.

In a report published in the LA Times, journalist and author David K. Randall's breaks down how climate change creates a perfect storm for some of the key factors behind outbreaks of the plague.

As if the specter of droughts, floods, and dwindling resources wasn't scary enough, a new book details how the a rapidly changing climate is putting Los Angeles, the second biggest city in the U.S., at unique risk of a deadly outbreak of bubonic plague.

Never miss a Moment Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.

Get more of what you love Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.

Learn the latest Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.

Join the conversation Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you're passionate about, and jump right in.

Spread the word The fastest way to share someone else's Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.

Say a lot with a little When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart '-- it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.

Tweets not working for you? Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.

Welcome home! This timeline is where you'll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.

"They show men kissing and Perlin freezes. Oh, my god, this is gay propaganda on BT! A historic moment indeed," remarked another.

The sentiment was echoed by others on social media. One user tweeted: "A homophobic commentator is an embarrassment to the country."

Another journalist, BelaPAN news agency director Andrei Aliaksandrau didn't hold back: "It feels like the Belarusian Television presenter really hit rock bottom this time, though BT is a champion in hitting rock bottom."

"I felt so embarrassed!" wrote Radio Liberty journalist Ales Piletski on Facebook. "The good thing is that these boorish jokes are not heard in other countries."

Image copyright EPA Image caption "We all deserve to be loved," Dana International told the audience in Tel Aviv As Dana International was performing Bruno Mars's song Just The Way You Are, the Belarusian presenter remarked: "Dana is singing that love has no religion, no boundaries, no racial or any other limits. But you know, I want values to preserve their value, so that love remains love."

He went on to say that he hoped the cameramen will "finally find some cool couples" in the audience.

When the camera moved on to a man and a woman having a smooch, he added, with a sense of relief: "Ok, so far so good!" But a few seconds later, another male couple were shown kissing, at which point the presenter exclaimed: "Oh, come on!"

But after the first couple caught by the camera appeared to be two men kissing, the presenter reacted: "Oh, my goodness! Maybe we'd better not watch!"

"They are sending the kiss-cam across the hall! Let's see what we get!" Mr Perlin said.

Yavhen Perlin was providing live commentary during the semi-finals on 14 May, when a "kiss-cam" zoomed into affectionate couples during the performance by Israel's transgender pop diva Dana International.

Image copyright Belarus Television Image caption Some social media users said they felt embarrassed by Yavhen Perlin's remarks Homophobic remarks by a Belarusian state TV presenter during the Eurovision song contest in Israel have stirred indignation on social media in Belarus.

Further reading: Some Early Background on Release 15, in the context of the 5G story:

Other activities focused on broadening the applicability of 3GPP technology to non-terrestrial radio access systems '' from satellites and airborne base stations to maritime applications including ship-to-shore and ship-to-ship communications. Work also progressed on new Professional Mobile Radio (PMR) functionality for LTE, enhancing railway-oriented services originally developed using GSM radio technology which is now nearing its end of life.

As the Release 15 work has matured and drawn close to completion, the group's focus is now shifting on to the first stage of Release 16, often referred to informally as '5G Phase 2'. By the end of the year, 83 studies relating to Release 16 plus a further thirteen relating to Rel-17 were in progress, covering topics as diverse as Multimedia Priority Service, Vehicle-to- everything (V2X) application layer services, 5G satellite access, Local Area Network support in 5G, wireless and wireline convergence for 5G, terminal positioning and location, communications in vertical domains and network automation and novel radio techniques. Further studies were launched or progressed on security, codecs and streaming services, LAN interworking, network slicing and the IoT.

After initial delivery in late 2017 of 'Non-Stand-Alone' (NSA) NR new radio specifications for 5G, much effort focused in 2018 on timely completion of 3GPP Release 15 '' the first full set of 5G standards '' and on work to pass the first milestones for the 3GPP submission towards IMT-2020.While initial specifications enabled non-standalone 5G radio systems integrated in previous-generation LTE networks, the scope of Release 15 expands to cover 'standalone' 5G, with a new radio system complemented by a next-generation core network. It also embraces enhancements to LTE and, implicitly, the Evolved Packet Core (EPC). This crucial way-point enables vendors to progress rapidly with chip design and initial network implementation during 2019.

If you do not want to visit that page, you can return to the previous page.

Millimeter wave: Millimeter waves are broadcast at frequencies between 30 GHz and 300 GHz, compared with the bands below 6 GHz used for 4G LTE. The new 5G networks will be able to transmit very large amounts of data'--but only a few blocks at a time. Although the 5G standard will offer the greatest benefits over these higher frequencies, it will also work in low frequencies as well as unlicensed frequencies that WiFi currently uses, without creating conflicts with existing WiFi networks. For this reason, 5G networks will use small cells to complement traditional cellular towers.Small cells: Small cells are low-powered portable base stations that can be placed throughout cities. Carriers can install many small cells to form a dense, multifaceted infrastructure. Small cells' low-profile antennas make them unobtrusive, but their sheer numbers make them difficult to set up in rural areas. As 5G technology matures, consumers should expect to see ubiquitous 5G antennas, even in their own homes.Massive MIMO: 5G technology enables base stations to support many more antennas than 4G base stations. With MIMO, both the source (transmitter) and the destination (receiver) have multiple antennas, thus maximizing efficiency and speed. MIMO also introduces interference potential, leading to the necessity of beamforming.Beamforming: Beamforming is a 5G technology that finds the most efficient data-delivery route to individual users. Higher-frequency antennas enable the steering of narrower transmission beams. This user-specific beamforming allows transmissions both vertically and horizontally. Beam direction can change several times per millisecond. Beamforming can help massive MIMO arrays make more efficient use of the spectrum around them.Full duplex: Full duplex communication is a way to potentially double the speed of wireless communication. By employing a 5G full duplex scheme on a single channel, only one channel is needed to transmit data to and from the base station, rather than two. A potential drawback of full duplex is that it can create signal interference.SDN: SDN and network functions virtualization (NFV) are considered the foundation for how 5G will be deployed.5G Technology Is RampantThis assemblage of 5G technology'--along with much more that's still evolving through vendor cooperation'--will power the wireless networks of the future, enabling such use cases as interactive television, high-definition and 3-D video, social gaming, virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR), robotics, automated vehicles, advanced manufacturing, healthcare imaging and diagnostics, and more.

The 5G Technology That Will Make Everything HappenAs the 5G technology market comes into focus, we're seeing a number of technologies emerge as vital to the 5G experience. These include the aforementioned mmWave technology; small cells; massive multiple input, multiple output (MIMO); full duplex; software-defined networking (SDN); and beamforming.

But when you dig deeper into the 5G evolution, you'll find an array of 5G technology that will underpin future wireless communications.

The forthcoming 5G technology will come from various vendors and will be composed of solutions designed to provide very fast download speeds and low latency. Today'--in advance of 5G's expected debut around 2020'--companies such as Verizon, AT&T, Samsung, and Ericsson are testing new advances in signal processing, chips, and antenna technologies that will enable the next generation of mobile connectivity.

5G technology is the next generation of wireless communications. It is expected to provide Internet connections that are least 40 times faster than 4G LTE. 5G technology may use a variety of spectrum bands, including millimeter wave (mmWave) radio spectrum, which can carry very large amounts of data a short distance. The drawback of the higher frequencies is that they are more easily obstructed by the walls of buildings, trees and other foliage, and even inclement weather.

The AT&T 5G FutureBy conducting its tests and trials with a variety of audiences, AT&T is gaining new insights into mmWave performance characteristics that are necessary for industry standards development. The company is working with other top players to make 5G a reality.

AT&T expects 5G to introduce new experiences and use cases to consumers and businesses'--largely thanks to the advantages of enhanced mobile broadband, critical Internet of Things (IoT) solutions, and low-latency applications. Participants in this trial were able to experience the real-life benefits that fixed wireless 5G offers.

''The technology behind 5G is about advancing social trends like mobile video streaming,'' said Knight. ''The network of the future will help redefine what connectivity means to both consumers and businesses. This trial helps show that the new reality is coming fast.''

AT&T 5G: Faster BroadbandConcurrently, AT&T is testing faster broadband service in which a connection's last leg is delivered by mmWave to a home or business. The company delivered an ultra-fast Internet connection to residential, small business, and enterprise locations. Trial participants were able to enjoy faster broadband services and stream live TV via DirectTV Now over a fixed wireless 5G signal.

AT&T plans to continue testing fixed and mobile wireless solutions operating in the mmWave spectrum. What the company learns from these AT&T 5G trials should help speed up standards-based deployment as early as late 2018.

''Taking our fixed wireless 5G trials out of the lab and into the real world helps us learn important factors about mmWave and 5G,'' said Marachel Knight, SVP, wireless network architecture and design at AT&T. ''And in doing so, we're learning how to better design our network for the future.''

AT&T 5G: mmWave PerformanceIn 2017, AT&T launched a series of fixed wireless 5G trials to business and residential customers, gaining insight into mmWave performance and propagation. The company is learning interference-related lessons involving device placement, surrounding environment (foliage, building materials), and weather '-- specifically, how those things impact the signal and system in real-world environments.

Following are some tests and trials that the company has been performing recently, resulting in new intelligence about millimeter-wave (mmWave) spectrum.

AT&T is conducting 5G trials and using the data collected to contribute to the 3GPP wireless standards body's work on 5G. The telecom giant is deploying equipment, investing in a specific mix of spectrum and technology, and laying the foundation for its evolution to 5G. AT&T intends to deliver state-of-the-art 5G speeds as soon as late 2018.

£ £ £ £ALTICE MVNO COMMITMENT£££T-Mobile and Sprint commit that: (A) >> >>' µ¨¹¨ ¤>>¥ --      set forth in the Master Wireless Wholesale Agreement by and between Sprint and Altice USA, Inc. ¤°¥  ·' ¬... (C)ª­ ¤ ° ¶¾·¸ °¥, or in any other existing agreement between Sprint and Altice, that arises from consummation of the merger between T-Mobile and Sprint Corporation; and (B) New T-Mobile will negotiate in good faith an amendment of the Altice MVNO Agreement to include the networks, including 5G network, operated by New T-Mobile. -- --' ' 

Ms. Marlene H. Dortch February 4, 2019 Page 3 whichever occurs first.9 The retained legacy rate plans may be adjusted to pass through cost increases in taxes, fees and surcharges as well as services from third party partners that are included in the rate plans, as these increased costs are not within the control of New T-Mobile. The legacy plans may also be adjusted to modify or discontinue third party partner benefits based on changes in the terms of the offering initiated by the third party partner, as this is also not within the control of New T-Mobile.10 As New T-Mobile CEO John Legere has said, we would be pleased to discuss the details of this commitment with the Chairman, Commissioners and Transaction Team. As noted, this representation is fully consistent with the New T-Mobile business plan and responsive to merger-specific questions that have been raised. For those reasons, the Applicants have no objection to this representation being included as a formal merger condition in the order approving the transaction. Please direct any questions regarding the foregoing to the undersigned counsel for Deutsche Telekom and T-Mobile. Respectfully submitted, DLA Piper LLP (US) /s/ Nancy Victory Nancy Victory Partner cc: Chairman Ajit Pai ¹'''-- '-- ®--¨ Commissioner Brendan Carr Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel Commissioner Geoffrey Starks David Lawrence Kathy Harris Linda Ray Kate Matraves 9 When a better post-merger plan is offered, New T-Mobile may discontinue a less appealing legacy plan. 10 Device/handset offerings are not included in this pricing commitment. -- --' ' 

Ms. Marlene H. Dortch February 4, 2019 Page 2 executives,4 merger simulations focused on New T-Mobile prices,5 and economic work showing all wireless consumers will benefit from a decrease in price per GB due to competitive responses from AT&T and Verizon.6 The Public Interest Statement also provided further assurances to existing customers of T-Mobile and Sprint that prices will not go up following the close of the merger. Specifically, the Applicants stated that ¬New T-Mobile will guarantee each [Sprint] customer a rate plan that is equal or better than the plans they currently enjoy with Sprint.­7 The Applicants also noted the T-Mobile Un-contract rate promise to their customers and that it would be extended to Sprint customers post-closing.8 These assurances were intended to address any concerns about post-closing price increases and they are fully consistent with the New T-Mobile business plan. Despite all this, merger opponents tried to raise questions about New T---® '' incentives during the three-year period from merger closing until completion of the network combination and customer migration. The Applicants believe that the myriad showings on the record fully answer those questions. However, to remove all doubt and simplify the ¹'''® --¥--...  £-- '----, the Applicants are providing the following statement to remove any doubts, concerns or ambiguity: New T-Mobile will make available the same or better rate plans as those offered by T-Mobile or Sprint as of ¸µ date for three years following the merger. T-Mobile and Sprint legacy rate plans will continue as New T-Mobile plans for three years after the merger or until better plans that offer a lower price or more data are made available, 4 Public Interest Statement, Appx C, Declaration of G. Michael Sievert, President and Chief Operating Officer, T-Mobile US, Inc. at ¶21; Public Interest Statement, Appx. D, Declaration of Peter Ewens, Executive Vice President, Corporate Strategy, T--- § ''(C) £ " ¥¬¼...--' >>--'(C)­...(C) 5 Joint Opposition, Appx. F, Declaration of Compass Lexecon, Mark Israel, Michael Katz, and Bryan Keating at ¶6; John Asker, Timothy F. Bresnahan, and Kostis Hatzitaskos, Economic Analysis of the Proposed T-Mobile/Sprint Merger, Cornerstone Research at 1-6 (Nov. 6, 2018). 6 Public Interest Statement, Appx. G, Declaration of David S. Evans, Market Platform Dynamics, ¬¼'''' ·'¨  £-- ''£  £-- --' ----  -Mobile and Sprint on the Deployment of °¾ ¹--¤ --''--§ £-- °¾ · ¼'¨£--'§ '' ¹'¤'--§ ¼'£----§ '' £-- ¼'''¨§­ £ ¶¶220-44. 7 Ewens Decl. at ¶8. 8 Id. -- --' ' 

DLA Piper LLP (US) 500 Eighth Street, NW Washington, DC 20004 www.dlapiper.com Nancy Victory nancy.victory@dlapiper.com T 202.799.4216 F 202.799.5616 February 4, 2019 VIA ECFS Marlene H. Dortch Secretary Federal Communications Commission 445 Twelfth Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20554 Re: Applications of T-Mobile US, Inc. and Sprint Corporation for Consent to Transfer Control of Licenses and Authorizations; WT Docket No. 18-197 Dear Ms. Dortch: ¤¤'£ £ --'£' ¬(C)¬­±¥...  £-- ¹'''® ¤--§ ¯² ¹(C)½(C)(C) ª ¬(C)¬­±¥...§ '£'--  hereby provided of a written ex parte presentation in the above-referenced docket. T-Mobile US, ''(C) ¥¬---­... '' '£ ¹£' ¥¬'£­§ '' '--'£¥--¨ ...£ -Mobile, ¬·''£­... ¥-- ££--' ' £-- ¤' '£----£ ££--'--'£§ '' --£--£--' ----£--'¨ ''--§ ££ the merger will --'¤-- ££ ¬·'--'' ''¤'-- ... ¨ -- '' --£ '--­(C)1 Our merger will enable the deployment of a world-class nationwide 5G network with massive capacity and lower marginal costs per customer, with the result that customers get better service and more data at the same or lower prices.2 -- ·''£® ------'££' ££ ''¤'-- ... ¨ --   --¤£  the merger is supported by the New T-Mobile business plan,3 declarations from T-Mobile 1 See, e.g., Applications of T-Mobile US, Inc. and Sprint Corporation for Consent to Transfer Control of the Licenses and Authorizations, WT Docket No. 18-197, Description of Transaction, Public Interest Statement, and Related Demonstrations at i (June 18, 2018) ¥¬¤' '£----£ ££--'--'£­...¶ Applications of T-Mobile US, Inc. and Sprint Corporation for Consent to Transfer Control of Licenses and Authorizations, WT Docket No. 18-197, Joint Opposition of T-Mobile US, Inc. and Sprint Corporation at i (Sept. 17, 2018) ¥¬'£ £'­...(C) 2 Public Interest Statement at 51. 3 Id. -- --' ' 

¨£action under its forfeiture authority for failure to meet the commitments in Sections II and IV. The voluntary contribution shall be assessed and calculated in accordance with this section: A. If New T-Mobile fails to submit to the Bureau a wholesale MVNO agreement with the Buyer of the Divested Business (or in the case of a submitted agreement that has been rejected, a revised agreement) by the deadline set forth in Section IV.B., New T-Mobile shall owe a voluntary contribution of $3.5 million per day until a new agreement is submitted. B. If the Bureau decides that the submitted wholesale MVNO agreement is not consistent with the principles set forth in Section III.A., then the clock (if not yet expired) will continue without pause or, if the clock (and any extensions) has expired, a $3.5 million per day voluntary contribution will begin to accummulate immediately and continue until a revised wholesale MVNO agreement is submitted to the Bureau. C. If the Bureau finds that New T-Mobile did not have a good faith and reasonable belief that the wholesale MVNO agreement was consistent with the principles set forth in Section III.A., New T-Mobile shall owe a voluntary contribution of $3.5 million per day for the period during which the Bureau was reviewing the agreement. D. If the Bureau decides that the wholesale MVNO agreement is consistent with the principles set forth in Section III.A., but that New T-Mobile has not met the obligation in Section II, then New T-Mobile must take appropriate ste'  ''' ·'§' competitiveness to the Bureau§' ''''  shall make a voluntary contribution of $3.5 million per day starting from the date that the wholesale MVNO agreement was submitted until those steps are complete. E. If the Bureau decides both that the agreement was not consistent with the principles set forth in Section III.A. and that New T-Mobile has not met the obligation in Section II, then New T-Mobile shall make a voluntary contribution of $3.5 million per day from the date that the wholesale MVNO agreement was submitted until both of these problems have been remedied and the divestiture is complete. -- --' ' 

§£New T-Mobile network on a nondiscriminatory basis, and reasonable advance notice of network transition plans that could affect New Boost customers. B. Transition Services Agreement. The Transition Services Agreement offered to the Buyer will include up to a two-year term (as required by Buyer) with customary transition services offered at cost to the Buyer. The terms of the Transition Services Agreement (or any other related agreement) shall be consistent with, and not undercut, the principles in Section III.A., to the extent they are applicable. IV. Commission Review of Buyer and New Boost Wholesale MVNO Agreement. New T-Mobile must submit the wholesale MVNO agreement negotiated with the Buyer to the Wireless ''' ·' ¥¥·'...... for review prior to consummating the divestiture. A. ' ·£' '   ¥''''  '' '''-'£ £'§... ''' will be an entity that: 1. has, or has access to, the financial resources to acquire, maintain and expand the Divested Business, and 2. is unrelated to either of the Applicants. B. A New Boost wholesale MVNO agreement, consistent with the principles in Section III.A., must be submitted to the Bureau for review within 120 days after closing of the T-Mobile/Sprint merger. 1. No later than seven (7) days prior to the deadline, New T-Mobile may request from the Bureau a thirty-day extension of the deadline. To obtain an extension from the Bureau, New T-Mobile would have to provide a status report and certify that it is both undertaking commercially reasonable efforts to reach a final agreement as quickly as practicable and to meet its obligation in Section II. Under this process, New T-Mobile may request, and the Bureau may grant, up to two thirty-day extensions. 2. Once the New Boost wholesale MVNO agreement is submitted, the Bureau will have 30 days to make a decision as to whether the agreement is consistent with the principles set forth in Section III.A. and whether New T-Mobile has fulfilled its obligation in Section II. This 30-day review timeline can be extended only with the consent of New T-Mobile. V. Enforcement. In the event that the Bureau determines that New T-Mobile has failed to meet the requirements in Sections II and/or IV, New T-Mobile shall make a voluntary contribution to the U.S. Treasury in the manner directed by the Bureau within 60 days of such determination. This voluntary contribution will be in lieu of the Commission taking any -- --' ' 

...£today. For clarity, the pricing will not prevent New T-Mobile from recouping its full network costs associated with serving New Boost customers. b.  ·'§' '' ' ''' '  '  ' ' ' -run network cost efficiencies of New T-'§' °½ ' oyment. c.  ·'§' '' ' ''' ' '£ ''   ' commercial terms reflected in T-'§'  ''§' ® ''  agreements based on 1Q 2019 wholesale revenues. For clarity, the commercial terms will meaningfully improve on those reflected in each of the 6 agreements, taking each as an entire agreement. 2. Discrimination and Competitive Constraints a.  ·'§' '' ' '   -Mobile from treating New Boost in a discriminatory or anticompetitive manner as compared to Metro or any successor to Metro as New T-'§' '  ' '§ '' ' through unwanted discriminatory throttling, de-prioritization, or limitations on access to new network technologies. For the avoidance of doubt, reducing '§' 'es to win subscribers from New Boost would not constitute anticompetitive treatment. b.  ·'§' '' '  ''' ' ' ''' ' ' '' '' services. 3. Long-Term Competition and Facilities Deployment a.  ·'§' '' ' '' it to deploy and utilize its own spectrum, systems, network infrastructure, and other facilities if it chooses, and enjoy reasonable cost benefits of doing so. b.  ·'§' '' ' '' '   ' £   -term basis, with a minimum wholesale agreement term of six years, and New T-Mobile will not unreasonably withhold consent to changes in New Boost ownership (for example, it would not be unreasonable for New T-Mobile to withhold consent to a change of control to a facilities-based provider who refuses to provide New T-' '' ''' ''  ' ' ''§' facilities on reasonable terms; it would be unreasonable to withhold consent to a sale with the objective of keeping New Boost in the hands of an unsuccessful owner). 4. S ''''   ·'§' ''' a. New T-' ' '' ·'§' '' '' ''' '' ''''  independent ownership. b.  ·'§' '' ' ' '  ·' '' ''  '  -Mobile network on the same timeline as Sprint, the ability to activate on the -- --' ' 

BOOST MOBILE DIVESTITURE T-Mobile and Sprint commit to divest the Boost Mobile business. The market-based process implemented by the Applicants will ensure that New T-Mobile will divest Boost Mobile to a serious and credible buyer ¥¥·y'...... and receive fair value for the assets. As part of the process contemplated in this commitment, the Applicants and Buyer will be free to agree to commercial terms of their choosing, subject only to the limitations set out below: I. Overview of Divested Business. The Boost Mobile assets and operations to be divested (the ¥¹' ' ·''''... ' ¥ ·'...) include: A. Boost Mobile-branded customers ''  ¥' ... ·' Mobile account;1 and B. ¥Dedicated... Boost Mobile assets, properties, systems, management team and employees that are necessary to operate the Boost Mobile business as it is conducted as of the merger closing date.2 The Divested Business will include all ownership interests in, and rights to use, the Boost Mobile brand and its associated brands and trademarks.3 II. Obligation to Maintain Divested Business Prior to Divestiture. New T-Mobile must undertake commercially reasonable efforts to maintain Boos§' competitiveness prior to completion of the divestiture. III. Commercial Arrangements with Buyer. To allow for the continued operation and growth of New Boost, New T-Mobile will offer two principal support arrangements to the Buyer: A. Wholesale MVNO Agreement. The terms of the wholesale MVNO agreement will be consistent with the following principles: 1. Wholesale Network Pricing a.  ·'§' '' ' ''' ' '  '' ''   ability for New T-Mobile to compete against New Boost for customers, and vice versa, similar to their respective competitive incentives and capabilities £££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££1 For purposes of this submission§  ¥' ... ·' '  '' any account that (i) has had a positive account balance at any time during the 120 days immediately prior to the Boost Mobile divestiture closing date, and (ii) has not been suspended, cancelled or otherwise terminated during such 120 -day period. Divested customers do not include Boost Mobile customers of third parties who are not controlled by Sprint and offer wireless service under the Boost brand. 2 ¼' '''  ''' '''''§ ¥'... ' £ ''§ ''£§ '£' ' £ ' '' 'lely and exclusively allocated for use by Boost Mobile. 3 The divestiture of the Boost Mobile business will ensure all third parties who have rights to utilize the Boost brand and marks shall retain such rights.£-- --' ' 

££2010 U.S. Census, but then updated based on more recent information. According to the 2016 Pitney Bowles study, the Rural Population is 61.98M. That population number is fixed for purposes of calculating compliance with these commitments as is the population per census block through which covered pops will be determined. (P) ®¨££¥§ ¨......¯ '... ' --... §... '' ¨...... §--§ ª -Mobile will have the capacity to serve with its In-home Broadband Service at any given time (based upon an average usage across the sector of GB per month per household as of 3 years following the close of the T-Mobile/Sprint merger and an average usage across the sector of GB per month per household as of 6 years following the merger closing). Supported Households will be calculated according to the methodology set out in T-'°... ex parte filing detailing its In-Home Broadband plans. See Letter from Nancy Victory, Counsel for T-Mobile, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, WT Docket No. 18-197 (Mar. 6, 2019). Within 60 days of the closing of the T-Mobile/Sprint merger, New T-Mobile and the Bureau will work in good faith to refine this methodology to utilize actual deployment numbers. (Q) ®-Mobile-¾¥§'' ² (C)'¯  --... -- (C)' §--§ -Mobile or New T-Mobile has certified as compatible with its 5G network (it is expected that all 5G devices available through New T-Mobile retail will be T-Mobile-Certified 5G Devices). (R) ® £¨--§'¯ '... ' --... § ££¨--§'  § '§ §--§... ...'¨' § ²­ states, Puerto Rico and the U.S. territories) as derived from population data licensed through the 2016 Pitney Bowles study, which provides population at the census block level. The 2016 Pitney Bowles study is based on the 2010 U.S. Census, but then updated based on more recent information. According to the 2016 Pitney Bowles study, the U.S. Population is 327.48M. That population number is fixed for purposes of calculating compliance with these commitments as is the population per census block through which covered pops will be determined. -- --' ' 

ª££(B) ®5G Sites¯ '... ' --...  --¥ ...'§...  ª' ² ¥--'... --¥ £¬ (C) ®5G Sites Deployed in Rural Areas¯  --... ² Sites that are physically located within a Rural Area. (D) ®² Spectrum¯ '... ' --... '--§ '... ...£§¥¨ ¨... ¥ ª' ¥ ¨£' with 5G radios and does not include spectrum shared dynamically with LTE. (E) ®¼......¯ § ...£'' ...£...  --... §--§ ¨...¥...  -Mobile-Certified 5G Devices will experience the specified download speeds on average (mean) across actual utilization. (F) ®'' ¨...¯ '... ' --... -- ¨... --§ ' -- ¥--£¬· ...¼§ (C)¥ which New T-'°... §ª¥ ª' £¥(C)' ...'-- ¤¨--'§¬ ...¨'§-- § ...¨££¥§ § In-home Broadband Service; and (B) in which New T-'°... §ª¥ --... ...¨''§ capacity to serve one or more households with In-home Broadband Service, as shown in the polygon shapefile submitted to the Bureau. (G) ®-home Broadband Service¯ '... ' --s a residential broadband service with minimum speeds of 25 Mbps downlink and 3 Mbps uplink. (H) ®ª--- ² ¾(C)¥-- ¼¥--¯ '... ' --... §--§ --¥-- '¨ ª'§' § ¨...  the polygon shapefile submitted to the Bureau representing geographic coverage for 5G service using Low-band Frequencies with coverage based on T-'°... ¥'--¥¬ course coverage analysis. The coverage shapefiles used to calculate covered pops will be verified by a drive test at the 3 and 6 year intervals. See n.1. (I) ®ª--- ¥¤¨'...¯ '... defined as those radiowave frequencies below 1 GHz including, but not limited to, frequencies in the 600 MHz, 700 MHz, and 800 MHz bands. (J) ®--¥§¯ '... ' --... § --(C)¥§'... -- ¥ -- £¥¨§ ¥ ...rvice for sale including, but not limited to, through TV, radio, Internet, digital, electronic, voice, print, mail, or in-person channels. (K) ®'--- ² ¾(C)¥-- ¼¥--¯ '... ' --... §--§ --¥-- '¨ ª'§' § ¨...  the polygon shapefile submitted to the Bureau representing geographic coverage for 5G service using Mid-band Frequencies with coverage based on T-'°... ¥'--¥¬ course coverage analysis. The coverage shapefiles used to calculate covered pops will be verified by a drive test at the 3 and 6 year intervals. See n.1. (L) ®Mid--- ¥¤¨'...¯ '... ' --... §... ¥--'ª--(C) ¥¤¨'... --(C) ® ­ -- below 6 GHz including, but not limited to, the AWS, PCS, and 2.5 GHz bands. (M)®¨¥-- ¼¥--¯ '... --... ' ¬ § ¯­®­  ¾...¨... (N) ®¨¥-- ¨......¯ '... ' --... ¨...... --§ ª'§' -- ¨¥-- ¼¥-- (O) ®¨¥-- £¨--§'¯ '... ' --... § ££¨--§' ª'§' Rural Areas derived from the population data licensed through the 2016 Pitney Bowles study, which provides population at the census block level. The 2016 Pitney Bowles study is based on the -- --' ' 

(C)££follows (with a maximum contribution for such a determination of $2.4 billion repeatable as described in Section V.C.): 1. The amount of the voluntary contribution shall be cumulative, calculated separately for each missed commitment (Sections I(B), II(B), and III(B) each constituting an individual commitment) commensurate with the percentage by which New T-Mobile missed the commitment. The total amount of the voluntary contribution shall be the sum of the amounts assessed for each missed commitment; 2. Where a commitment has multiple elements (as in Sections I(B), II(B), and III(B)), the Bureau shall determine the percentage by which New T-Mobile has fallen short under each element and calculate the voluntary contribution based on the highest calculated percentage missed of any element; 3. Each 1% of shortfall with respect to the commitment in Sections I.B.5 and II.B.5 shall constitute 0.5% for purposes of the calculation in 2; 4. The voluntary contribution for each 1% (rounded to the nearest tenth of a percent) up to 20% that a commitment is missed shall be $10,000,000, and $5,000,000 for each 1% thereafter; however, the minimum contribution amount shall be $25,000,000; and 5. The voluntary contribution calculated for failure to meet the commitment described in Section II shall be doubled.7 (C) New T-'°... '--§' § ¨' §   '§ §... ' §'... ...½§(C) ...½§(C) -- III(B) remains until satisfied. Within one year after a Bureau determination that New T-Mobile was deficient with respect to any element of these commitments, New T-Mobile shall submit to the Bureau a report demonstrating whether it has satisfied any remaining deficient element(s). A determination by the Bureau that New T-Mobile has failed to meet any of the remaining deficient elements shall be subject to the same voluntary contribution amounts described in Section V(B) and the process described in this section V(C) until satisfied. (D) In making a determination regarding New T-'°...  £'-- ¨¥ §'... IV(A)-(C) above, the Bureau shall take into account and, in its reasonable discretion, appropriately reduce the metric, extend the deadline or reduce the contribution amount associated with commitments missed due to unanticipated circumstances ¬ §  £--¬°... §¥ ...e.g., acts of God, such as fire, flood, earthquake, or other natural disasters; terrorist events, riots, insurrections, war, strikes or national emergencies; law or order of any government body; or significant interruptions in the supply chain). VI. Definitions. The following terms are used in this document: (A) ®²¯ '... ' --... § ² ª --' --'¥ '§¥-- ...§----¥ --... ...¥' ' ° Release 15. Available at https://www.3gpp.org/release-15. £££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££7 For example, a 20% shortfall on each of the commitments in Sections I(B), II(B) and III(B) would translate into a combined $800M voluntary contribution ($200M + (2 X $200M) + $200M = $800M). -- --' ' 

¨££above, New T-Mobile will make a voluntary contribution to the U.S. Treasury in the manner directed by the Bureau within 60 days of such determination. This voluntary contribution will be in lieu of the Commission taking any action under its forfeiture authority for failure to meet the commitments described in Sections I-III above. The amount of the voluntary contribution will be calculated in accordance with this section: (A) In the event that the Bureau determines that New T-Mobile has failed to meet any of the 3-year commitments, the applicable voluntary contribution shall be calculated as follows: 1. The amount of the voluntary contribution shall be cumulative, calculated separately for each missed commitment (Sections I(A), II(A), and III(A) each constituting an individual commitment) commensurate with the percentage by which New T-Mobile missed the commitment. The total amount of the voluntary contribution shall be the sum of the amounts assessed for each missed commitment; 2. Where a commitment has multiple elements (as in Sections I(A), II(A), and III(A)), the Bureau shall determine the percentage by which New T-Mobile has fallen short under each element6 and calculate the voluntary contribution for the particular missed commitment based on the highest calculated percentage missed of any element; 3. Each 1% of shortfall with respect to the commitment in Sections I.A.5 and II.A.5 shall constitute 0.5% for purposes of the calculation in 2; and 4. The following contribution scale will apply: Missed Percentage Voluntary Contribution >0%-5% $10,000,000 >5%-10% $25,000,000 >10%-25% $50,000,000 >25%-50% $100,000,000 >50% $250,000,000 £(B) In the event that the Bureau determines that New T-Mobile has failed to meet any of the 6-year commitments, the applicable voluntary contribution shall be calculated as £££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££6 For example, if there is a commitment to serve 55% of the population (180.1M people out of a total population of 327.48M) and New T-Mobile is able to serve only 160.3M by the deadline, the company would fall short by 19.8M people, which would be a percentage missed of 11% (19.8M · 180.1M X 100 = 11%). -- --' ' 

§££Rural Households. Provided, however, that the requirements of Sections III.A.1 and III.B.1 will terminate once New T-Mobile has 9.5 million simultaneous In-home Broadband Service subscribers. IV. Verification. T-Mobile and Sprint commit that: (A) Within 60 days following each of the first, second, fourth and fifth annual anniversaries of the closing date of the T-Mobile/Sprint merger, New T-Mobile will submit to the Bureau a report that details the progress the company is making toward meeting the site and spectrum deployment and other commitments described in Sections I-II and the In-home Broadband commitments described in Section III (including the number of subscribers) as of the corresponding anniversary date. (B) Within 9 months following each of the third and sixth annual anniversaries of the closing date of the T-Mobile/Sprint merger, New T-Mobile will submit to the Bureau a report that will include: 1. drive test results; 2. polygon shapefiles showing New T-Mobile°... ª-band 5G Coverage Area and Mid-band 5G Coverage Area as of the 3-year or 6-year date (whichever is applicable); 3. a statement quantifying the U.S. Population and Rural Population covered by each of the Low-band 5G Coverage Area and Mid-band 5G Coverage Area as of the 3-year or 6-year date (whichever is applicable); 4. a list of 5G Sites (including information identifying individual sites, e.g., latitude and longitude) and spectrum deployed, broken into rural and non-rural categories; 5. a certification from New T-'°... ¾' ¬ '¥ §--§ § representations in the shapefiles, population coverage numbers, site and spectrum deployment numbers, and speeds are true and correct; 6. a statement describing the means by which New T-Mobile has Marketed its In-home Broadband Service product to date; 7. the number of households, with reasonable precision, that received or were covered by each form of In-home Broadband Service Marketing as of the 3-year or 6-year date (whichever is applicable); 8. the number of Supported Households, and of those the number of Rural Households; 9. the number of subscribers of New T-'°... In-home Broadband Service as of the 3-year or 6-year date (whichever is applicable); and 10. a certification from New T-Mobile°... ¨§'(C) ' --¥  § -home Broadband Service business that the representations in the report regarding In-home Broadband Service Marketing, Supported Households and number of subscribers are true and correct. V. Enforcement. T-Mobile and Sprint agree that, in the event that the Bureau determines that New T-Mobile has failed to meet any of the commitments described in Sections I-III -- --' ' 

...££(A) within three (3) years of the closing date of the T-Mobile/Sprint merger, New T-Mobile will deploy a 5G network with: 1. a Low-band 5G Coverage Area covering at least 85% of the Rural Population; 2. a Mid-band 5G Coverage Area covering at least 55% of the Rural Population; 3. 5G Sites Deployed in Rural Areas; 4. MHz of low-band and mid-band 5G Spectrum averaged over 5G Sites deployed in Rural Areas (the sites described in Section II.A.3 above); 5. 66.7% of the Rural Population having access to download speeds equal to or greater than 50 Mbps, as verified by a drive test; and 6. 55% of the Rural Population having access to download speeds equal to or greater than 100 Mbps,4 as verified by a drive test. (B) within six (6) years of the closing date of the T-Mobile/Sprint merger, New T-Mobile will deploy a 5G network with: 1. a Low-band 5G Coverage Area covering at least 90% of the Rural Population; 2. a Mid-band 5G Coverage Area covering at least 66.7% of the Rural Population; 3. 5G Sites Deployed in Rural Areas; 4. MHz of low-band and mid-band 5G Spectrum averaged over 5G Sites deployed in Rural Areas (the sites described in Section II.B.3 above); 5. 90% of the Rural Population having access to download speeds equal to or greater than 50 Mbps, as verified by a drive test; and 6. 66.7% of the Rural Population having access to download speeds equal to or greater than 100 Mbps,5 as verified by a drive test. III. In-Home Broadband. T-Mobile and Sprint commit that: (A) within three (3) years of the closing date of the T-Mobile/Sprint merger, New T-Mobile will: 1. Market its In-home Broadband Service product to at least 9.6 million Eligible Households, of which at least 2.6 million are Rural Households; and 2. have at least million Supported Households, of which at least million are Rural Households. (B) within six (6) years of the closing date of the T-Mobile/Sprint merger, New T-Mobile will: 1. Market its In-home Broadband Service product to at least 28.0 million Eligible Households, of which 5.6 million are Rural Households; and 2. have at least million Supported Households, of which at least million are £££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££4 The 55% of the Rural Population having access to download speeds equal to or greater than 100 Mbps are expected to experience upload speeds of 15-20 Mbps. See n.2. 5 The 66.7% of the Rural Population having access to download speeds equal to or greater than 100 Mbps are expected to experience upload speeds of 15-20 Mbps. See n.2. -- --' ' 

NETWORK AND IN-HOME COMMITMENTS I. Nationwide 5G Network Deployment. T-Mobile and Sprint commit that: (A) within three (3) years of the closing date of the T-Mobile/Sprint merger, New T-Mobile will deploy a 5G network with: 1. a Low-band 5G Coverage Area covering at least 97% of the U.S. Population; 2. a Mid-band 5G Coverage Area covering at least 75% of the U.S. Population; 3. 5G Sites nationwide; 4. MHz of low-band and mid-band 5G Spectrum averaged over all 5G Sites deployed nationwide (the sites described in Section I.A.3 above); 5. 75% of the U.S. Population having access to download speeds equal to or greater than 50 Mbps, as verified by a drive test; 1 and 6. 63% of the U.S. Population having access to download speeds equal to or greater than 100 Mbps,2 as verified by a drive test. (B) within six (6) years of the closing date of the T-Mobile/Sprint merger, New T-Mobile will deploy a 5G network with: 1. a Low-band 5G Coverage Area covering at least 99% of the U.S. Population; 2. a Mid-band 5G Coverage Area covering at least 88% of the U.S. Population; 3. 5G Sites nationwide; 4. MHz of low-band and mid-band 5G Spectrum averaged over all 5G Sites deployed nationwide (the sites described in Section I.B.3 above); 5. 99% of the U.S. Population having access to download speeds equal to or greater than 50 Mbps, as verified by a drive test; and 6. 90% of the U.S. Population having access to download speeds equal to or greater than 100 Mbps,3 as verified by a drive test. II. Rural 5G Network Deployment. With regard to the nationwide 5G network deployment described above, T-Mobile and Sprint further commit that: £££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££1 New T-Mobile will fund the drive tests to take place at the end of years 3 and 6. The drive tests will utilize a methodology mutually agreed to by New T-Mobile and the Wireless Telecommunications ½¨¥--¨ ...®½¨¥--¨¯§ within 60 days of the closing of the T-Mobile/Sprint merger. The goal of the drive testing is to reflect actual user experience under ordinary utilization and compare them to the speed and coverage commitments stated in Sections I and II. The drive testing will involve oversight by an independent third party, but may be conducted by T-Mobile personnel. The drive testing will commence at the three (3) and six (6) year anniversary of the close of the transaction and be completed within nine (9) months thereafter in each case. The drive test would make use of T-Mobile-Certified 5G Devices. 2 While not a part of the formal commitment, the 63% of the U.S. Population having access to download speeds equal to or greater than 100 Mbps are expected to experience average upload speeds of 15-20 Mbps. 3 The 90% of the U.S. Population having access to download speeds equal to or greater than 100 Mbps are expected to experience average upload speeds of 15-20 Mbps. See n.2. -- --' ' 

Ms. Marlene H. Dortch May 20, 2019 Page 8 have described will happen in their Public Interest Statement and subsequent filings, as well as the accelerated and expanded deployment of the 5G network to rural America included in the merger commitments the Applicants make today. Commission Grant of the Transfer of Control Applications In view of the record in this merger proceeding and the commitments submitted herewith, the Applicants request prompt grant of their applications for transfer of control as serving the public interest. Please direct any questions regarding the foregoing to the undersigned counsel for the Applicants. Respectfully submitted, SPRINT CORPORATION By:_/s/ Regina M. Keeney______________ Regina M. Keeney A. Richard Metzger, Jr. Lawler, Metzger, Keeney & Logan, LLC 1717 K Street, NW, Suite 1075 Washington, DC 20006 (202) 777-7700 T-MOBILE US, Inc. By: _/s/ Nancy J. Victory______________ R. Michael Senkowski Nancy J. Victory DLA Piper LLP (US) 500 Eighth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20004 (202) 799-4000 cc: Chairman Ajit Pai Commissioner Michael O®Rielly Commissioner Brendan Carr Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel Commissioner Geoffrey Starks David Lawrence Kathy Harris Linda Ray Kate Matraves Jim Bird David Krech Joel Rabinovitz -- --' ' 

Ms. Marlene H. Dortch May 20, 2019 Page 7 capacity and lower per unit costs will create an incentive for the combined company to lower wholesale prices to MVNOs in order to ensure that the new network capacity is not wasted by sitting idle.10 MVNOs will benefit not only from the capabilities of the New T-Mobile network, but also the unprecedented capacity and lower cost per GB, which will translate into lower wholesale costs, and, ultimately, lower prices for MVNO subscribers.11 In addition to these competitive incentives, T-Mobile has publicly represented that New T-Mobile will honor the terms of existing Sprint and T-Mobile MVNO agreements¨ ''¤'' '£® ----'--'£ ...£ Altice.12 As described in Attachment 4, Applicants now commit that New T-Mobile will not exercise any £--''£' £ ¤''-- ¸£'--®   ----'--'£ ...£ '£ ££ '£ -- £----' ¨ £-- merger. In addit ion, New T-Mobile commits to engage in good faith negotiations to expand the existing Sprint/Altice agreement to the New T-Mobile 5G network. Verification and Enforcement Applicants take these commitments seriously, expect to be held to their word, and they are prepared for financial consequences if they fail to do so. Accordingly, Applicants commit to a verification and enforcement regime of unprecedented rigor. Failure to meet New T- --® obligations will trigger severe, increasing, and continuing voluntary contributions that will make failure prohibitively expensive and incentivize New T-Mobile to meet its commitments. At the same time, New T- --® '''£'--'£ will set a new standard for regulatory transparency, providing regular and robust information in annual reports regarding its progress in meeting its nationwide 5G, rural 5G, and in-home commitments. For New T- --® £-----year and six-year commitment dates, the company will provide a comprehensive report that includes data from drive tests, polygon coverage shapefiles, population and household coverage figures, site lists, marketing figures, and executive certifications. ¸''£® ¤ ¥--'£on processes will be accompanied by an even more exacting enforcement structure. Voluntary contributions will be calculated separately for each missed commitment. Furthermore, each of New T- --® §-year commitments will continue until satisfied and, accordingly, their respective voluntary contributions will continue to accrue and increase during their pendency. This enforcement standard is unprecedented in its strength. The Applicants are prepared to submit to the substantial financial consequences of missed deadlines or obligations because all of the deadlines and obligations are consistent with the New T-Mobile plan. They simply ensure that New T-Mobile does post-merger what the Applicants 10 Id. at 88. 11 Id. 12 Id. at 89. -- --' ' 

Ms. Marlene H. Dortch May 20, 2019 Page 6 The Applicants further commit that the MVNO arrangement will prevent New T-Mobile from treating New Boost in a discriminatory or anticompetitive manner relative to Metro, such as through unwanted discriminatory throttling, de-prioritization, or limitations on access to new network technologies. New T-Mobile will also offer other standard commercial support arrangements to the buyer, including a transition services agreement that is customary for a transaction of this nature. This will ensure that New Boost will be an aggressive competitor to New T-Mobile and other facilities-based, and non-facilities-based operators going forward. New T-Mobile commits to identify the buyer of Boost and submit the negotiated MVNO agreement to the FCC within 120 days of closing the merger (subject to two 30-day extensions). The divestiture process implemented by New T-Mobile will result in the orderly transfer of Boost customers to the Boost buyer. It will also ensure the continued and seamless operation of Boost during the pendency of the divestiture. New T-Mobile commits to make significant voluntary contributions to the U.S. Treasury should it fail to timely negotiate and submit to the Commission an MVNO agreement that adheres to the principles in its commitment or maintain the competitiveness of Boost during the divestiture process. Pricing Commitment Applicants demonstrated through business and economic evidence that wireless consumers will pay less for 5G service and get far better service and more data as a result of the merger. However, on February 4, 2019, to enhance the public interest benefits of the merger and simplify £-- >>'''® --§--'£¤ --¥--...¨ £-- ¸''£ ¤'££--'  ' '''£'--'£ ££ ¬--... T-Mobile will make available the same or bett er rate plans as those offered by T-Mobile or '£   £'¨® '£--  £---- ¨-- ...' £-- '----ª­8 The Applicants once again take this opportunity to unequivocally reaffirm the February 4, 2019, pricing commitment and include it for convenience as Attachment 3. As previously stated, this commitment not only ensures that prices cannot go up, but that 5G comes at no extra cost  in contrast to surcharges imposed by Verizon and planned by AT&T. In light of the proposed Boost divestiture, the commitment will cover the Boost plans only until Boost is divested. Commitments Regarding Altice As Applicants have demonstrated in the record, t he same economic principles that will drive lower prices for retail consumers will also apply to wholesale prices and MVNOs, creating a unique value proposition for New T- --®  ª9 New T- --® ''£' '--£... 8 See Letter from Nancy J. Victory, Counsel for T-Mobile US, Inc., to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, WT Docket No. 18-­µ" ...¾--ª °¨ ®¬­µ§ ...¬'' >>''£'--'£ --££--­§ª 9 Joint Opposition at 88-91. -- --' ' 

Ms. Marlene H. Dortch May 20, 2019 Page 5 speeds of 25 Mbps downlink and 3 Mbps uplink (more than fast enough for streaming 4K Ultra HD video); provide average speeds above 100 Mbps downlink; be priced significantly ( per month) below incumbent provider prices for service with comparable speeds; have no extra charge for the router; have no installation charge; have no contract; and provide customer care from T- --® ...'-winning Magenta Glove Team.7 Indeed, New T-Mobile Home Internet is poised to fundamentally shift the competitive landscape of one of the least-competitive industry segments in America. Rural Americans who want and need access or choice for in-home broadband will benefit from the newly accelerated and increased rural deployment of the 5G network described above. Indeed, the in-home broadband service deployment in rural areas also will be accelerated and increased. The number of supported rural households will be approximately 300,000 more within three years and approximately 400,000 more within six years from the closing than originally planned. Here again, rural Americans will be big beneficiaries of the commit ments. Applicants stand behind their representations in the record about their incentive and ability to deliver in-home broadband to millions, including in rural areas. As set forth in Attachment 1 at Section III, Applicants commit that, within three years of closing, New T-Mobile will market the in-home service to 9.6 million eligible households, of which at least 2.6 million are rural households and will have at least million supported households, of which at least million are rural households. In addition, within six years of closing, New T-Mobile will market its in-home broadband service to at least 28 million eligible households, of which 5.6 million are rural, and will have at least million supported households, of which at least million are rural households. Commitment for Divestiture of Boost Mobile ¸''£® ' ¤'-- ' '¥¥--' ''£' £-- '£ --' ''¨ ''¤'' ¹£  -- ...¬¹£­§¨ '£  '¥---- rtfolio of prepaid options that could leverage the powerful New T-Mobile 5G network to provide a high-quality, 5G prepaid service at a low price. While Applicants had planned that Boost would continue to be an effective and meaningful competitor as part of the New T-Mobile portfolio of brands, Applicants now commit to divest and sell the Boost business to remove any remaining doubts regarding the impact of the merger on prepaid wireless customers and competition. Therefore, as described in Attachment 2, Applicants will divest Boost through a market -based process to a serious and credible buyer. New T-Mobile will offer the Boost buyer terms for a six-year wholesale MVNO agreement that will include wholesale rates that will meaningfully improve upon the commercial terms reflected in the most favorable of T- --® '' '£® three largest MVNO agreements. The wholesale network arrangement will also ensure that New T-Mobile and New Boost retain strong incentives to compete against each other for customers. 7 See id. -- --' ' 

Ms. Marlene H. Dortch May 20, 2019 Page 4 ¸''£® ¤ --¥'-- '''£'--'£ --£ £ ' ¸££'hment 1 at Section II, accelerates and ''---- £-- ¸''£® --¥¤¨ ¤'££--' ± ''' '¥---- '  ¤ ¸'--''  by going further than any company has before to help bridge the rural Digital Divide. Specifically, New T-Mobile will accelerate the deployment of approximately mid-band sites in rural America, deploying them within three years of closing  years sooner than previously planned. New T-Mobile will also add 5G mid-band to approximately additional low-band sites within six years of closing to further accelerate rural 5G deployment. This rural mid-band acceleration will mean that the advantages of high-capacity mid-band spectrum will be extended to 6.5 million more rural Americans in the first three years of deployment  faster than originally planned. Further, by year six, New T-Mobile will increase its mid-band coverage of rural America by an additional 6.1 million rural Americans who would not have been covered with 5G mid-band spectrum in the original plan. As a result, within three years of closing, New T-Mobile will deliver 50 Mbps or higher to two-thirds of the rural population and 100 Mbps or higher to over half the rural population. £' § ¨--  £-- '----® '--¨ --... -Mobile will deploy a 5G network with low-band coverage of at least 90 percent of the rural population; mid-band coverage of at least 66.7 percent of the rural population; 5G sites in rural areas; an average of megahertz of low-band and mid-band 5G spectrum deployed per 5G site; 90 percent of the rural population experiencing download speeds equal to, or greater, than 50 Mbps; and 66.7 percent of the rural population experiencing download speeds equal to, or greater than, 100 Mbps. No other company has rural 5G deployment plans even remotely as aggressive as New T-Mobile, and New T-Mobile is the only company that will bring the benefits of 5G mid-band spectrum to millions of rural Americans. Again, New T-Mobile will lead the way for the U.S. to be the global champion for 5G. Commitment for In-Home Broadband Applicants have detailed thoroughly their plan to leverage the unprecedented coverage, capacity, and speed of New T- --® ± '--£... £ --  ¤''--' '-home broadband service, ...¬--... - -- '-- '£--'--£­§ '¥--' ¥--  £-- '¤'£¨® ¤--' £  ... '-- £ consumers and a low incremental cost to New T-Mobile.6 Applicants have demonstrated how this new service will create direct benefits for all in-home broadband consumers, regardless of whether they subscribe to New T-Mobile, by forcing incumbent broadband providers to lower prices and improve services to respond to an aggressive new broadband competitor. ¸''£® '  --... -Mobile Home Internet will break the mold for in-home broadband. ¸ '--'--' ' ¸''£® '¨ --... -Mobile Home Internet will: provide minimum 6 See generally Letter from Nancy J. Victory, Counsel to T-Mobile US, Inc., to Marlene T. Dortch, Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, WT Docket No. 18-­µ" ... ª ²¨ ®¬­µ§ ...¬'-home ¹''' ½§ £--­§ª -- --' ' 

Ms. Marlene H. Dortch May 20, 2019 Page 3 commitments verified by nationwide drive tests. The Applicants commit that within three years  £-- '----® ''¨ --... -Mobile will blanket three-¤£  £-- '¤'£¨® ¤£' with mid-'' --'£¤' '' '¥-- µ" --'--'£  £-- '¤'£¨® ¤£' ...£ ...-band spectrum. This broad and deep spectrum deployment will result in almost two-thirds of Americans receiving speeds in excess of 100 Mbps within three years of closing. Within six ¨--  £-- '----® '--¨ £-- ¸''£ '''£ £ '--¨  ± '--£... ...£